Pfl 1063 
.C6 
Copy 1 




PA 1063 
.C6 
Copy 1 



ROMAIC AND MODERN GREEK 



COMPARED WITH ONE ANOTHER, 



ANCIENT GREEK. 



tX 



JAMES CLYDE, M.A. 



v* 




EDINBURGH : SUTHERLAND AND KNOX. 
LONDON : SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO. 



MDCCCLV. 



MURRAY AND GIBB. PRINTERS, EDINBURGH. 



TO 

J. S. BLACKIE, 



PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH. 



By your public declarations that a language worthy 
of the Greek name survives, my attention was called two years 
ago to the dialects spoken and written by the modern Greeks : 
the specimens of the Athenian periodical press, with which you 
answered my first inquiries, convinced me that, antiquities apart, 
a residence in Athens would amply reward the student of Greek ; 
and, when you found me there in the spring of 1853, your enthu- 
siasm was my encouragement to prosecute the investigations 
begun. 

To you, therefore, as to a benefactor, I gratefully dedicate the 
following pages, in which is exhibited the result of eight months' 
observation and inquiry on the spot, being well persuaded that, if 
they elucidate in any measure the fortunes and prospects even of 
non-classical Greek, they will find an approver and patron in 
one who has given a new impetus to Greek studies in our native 
country, and, in particular, who first dared to assume before the 
British public the responsibility of recommending Modern Greek 
to the attention of classical students. 

I unite my wishes to those of a whole generation of Grecians, 
that you may long preside over the Greek studies in our metro- 
politan University, and reap the glory due to your abundant and 
enthusiastic labours. 

I am, 

Your most obedient Servant, 

JAMES CLYDE. 

Edinburgh, December 1854. 



TO THE READER. 



The following pages contain such an account of Romaic and 
Modern Greek as may exhibit to the classical student what 
has really become of the Greek language, once generally 
supposed to be dead, and now alleged by some to survive. 
This account will materially assist the inquiries of those who 
would enter on a detailed examination of the surviving dialects, 
whether by reading at home, or by visiting Greece; whilst 
the merely curious will find in it that summary of infor- 
mation and examples which they desiderate. 

A disquisition has two advantages in the present case over 
a grammar. From the multiplicity of dialects in Romaic, 
and the diversities of style in Modern Greek, both have a 
Protean character, and what is thus really manifold and un- 
settled, is apt to be represented as single and definite in a 
grammar, which presupposes the construction of model para- 
digms. Then, into a disquisition can be introduced with 
greater propriety the critical and historical matter which the 
subject demands. Whilst for these reasons the form of a 
grammar has been avoided, few grammatical peculiarities of 
Romaic or Modern Greek have been left unexplained, so 
that the attentive reader, who is already a tolerable Greek 
scholar, will find himself qualified to peruse works in either. 

No question is raised in the following pages concerning the 



VI TO THE READER. 

ancient mode, or the mode now practically best, of pronouncing 
Greek, because justice has been lately done to these- subjects 
in special treatises, by Pennington in England, and by Pro- 
fessor Blackie in Scotland. Neither are such questions enter- 
tained as the following : Of what advantage is a knowledge 
of Modern Greek to the classical student ? At what stage of 
scholarship should the student's attention be called to Modern 
Greek ? Is it desirable that our teachers of Greek accustom 
their pupils to conversation in the modern dialect? Of such 
questions some are answered by the mere exhibition of what 
Modern Greek is, and others must wait for solution till British 
scholars in general acquire more accurate and definite notions 
of Modern Greek than they yet possess. At present such 
questions can be neither intelligently entertained nor fairly 
answered by the great majority interested in them ; and a 
warfare of extreme views is all that can result from precipitat- 
ing their discussion. 

A considerable array of facts regarding Modern Greek has 
been set before the British public of late years, especially 
by Mr Corpe in London, Mr Donaldson in Edinburgh, and 
the several reviewers of Trikoupes' History of the Greek Re- 
volution. The present is a contribution of the same kind, 
but with this peculiarity, that an attempt is made to dis- 
tinguish, in a series of particulars, the Romaic dialect from 
Modern Greek, properly so called. To draw this distinction 
is important, as otherwise the totality of surviving Greek is 
invested with the characteristics of a part, and its approxima- 
tion to the ancient dialects underrated or exaggerated, accord- 
ing as the vulgar or the polite form of language is taken as 
the standard. To draw this distinction, however, is exceed- 
ingly difficult ; for, as usual in such cases, instead of a boundary 
line, there exists an indefinite border territory between the 
domains of popular and polite literature, and how this should 
be shared between the two must be to some extent matter of 



TO THE READER. 



Vll 



opinion. At the same time, that there does exist a marked 
difference between the vulgar and literary dialects is evident on 
the most cursory inspection of both, and the attempt to ascer- 
tain it, if successful, will be all the more meritorious for being 
difficult. 

THE AUTHOR. 



ROMAIC AND MODERN GREEK, 



PART I.— GENERAL REMARKS. 

To prevent confusion of ideas, it is necessary to define, at the 
outset, the sense in which certain designations will be used in the 
sequel. 

The term, Ancient Greek, will be applied, not only to the 
compositions called Classical, but to all Greek writings, of what- 
ever date, composed on the model of the classical vocabulary and 
grammar. The term Romaic will be confined to those popular 
dialects which, whensoever they arose, are known to have existed 
under the Byzantine empire, and which, or the like of which, 
are still spoken by the uneducated. The term Modern Greek 
will be given to that language in which the laws of the kingdom 
of Greece are written, and which is acknowledged by the Greeks 
everywhere, as their present literary dialect. 

The second of these terms, Romaic, is accepted, merely on the 
ground of prescription ; because, suggesting as it does, a Latin 
affinity, it is calculated to convey a false impression regarding the 
dialects to which it is applied. When the seat of empire was 
removed to Constantinople, the emperors retained their ancient 
title, translated however into Greek, BacvXe/g 'Pw^a/wy ; and just as, 
in later times, the victorious Franks gave their name to the nation, 
country, and language of the conquered Gauls, so the glorious 
name of Romans passed upon the race, provinces, and dialects of 
the subjugated Greeks. Thus the term Romaic has a political, 
not at all a literary origin, and properly describes neither the 
lineage of a people, nor the character of their language, but the 
imperial dynasty by which they were governed. 



Z GENERAL REMARKS. 

According to Apollonius, the Greeks, at a very early period, 
gratuitously adopted the family names of illustrious Romans. 
Fully two centuries before Byzantium became Nsa 'Pw/ajj, being on 
a visit to Smyrna, he was formally invited to the Panionic fes- 
tival, which was that year celebrated there ; and noticing, among 
the signatures to the invitation, a number of Roman names, as 
Lucullus and Fabricius, he addressed a sharp rebuke to his 
Ionian friends, which may be found in Philostratus, Epistle 71. 
The very next letter of the same collection is a shorter, but 
equally pithy reprimand, administered to his own brother, for 
the assumption of a Roman name : and to the prevalence of 
this Romanising spirit among the Greeks some would ascribe 
the facility, with which they afterwards renounced their an- 
cestral designation 'exXjjws, and accepted that of their con- 
querors. 

Other and more satisfactory reasons, however, account for the 
change. Not only the dynasty, the administration, and the army, 
in the East, were called Roman, according to political propriety ; 
but, in the fourth century at least, the Asiatic provinces of the 
empire were called Romania — a nomenclature of which modern 
geography has preserved a vestige in Europe, viz., Roumelia, 
i.e., country of the Romans. Nothing, then, was more natural 
than that the inhabitants should bear a name corresponding with 
that of the government under which they lived, and the territory 
which they occupied. But, perhaps, of all circumstances giving 
currency to the appellation 'Pw/^a/o/ among the Greeks themselves, 
and for them, among the surrounding non-Christian populations, 
the most decisive was the acknowledgment of Christianity by the 
Roman emperors, in consequence of which Roman became a sy- 
nonyme for Christian, whilst the idea of idolatry continued to be 
connected with "EWrjvsg. Accordingly the Greeks were called 
Eoum in the heading of the 30th chapter of the Koran, as indeed 
they are to this day by the Arabs and Turks. 

Since, then, the Greeks accepted the designation 'Pu^aioi, and 
the countries occupied by them received a cognate appellation, 
most naturally their spoken language was called 'Pu/Aa/xif* It 
borrowed as little from the language of the Romans as did French 
from the language of the Franks : but even had it not admitted 
a single Latin word, the foreign designation, which had passed 



GENERAL REMARKS. O 

upon the people and their territory, would not the less have 
reached also their language. 

The term Modern Greek is adopted, as being both historically 
and descriptively correct. In their popular songs, the Greeks call 
themselves variously 'Papa/bi, Tpcuxo), and "EXXyvsc. Till the be- 
ginning of the present century, the first of these was the current na- 
tional designation everywhere, as it still is among the uneducated in 
Greece enslaved ; but, at the revolutionary era, the Greeks re- 
called their ancient titles of glory, the liberated portion of their ter- 
ritory reassumed, with independence, its ancient name, y\ 'EXXag, 
the inhabitants were called 0/ "EXXyjvsg, and their cultivated lan- 
guage h Nzo-zXXyjvixri, i.e., Modern Greek. Nor is this term, like 
the one already discussed, a historical misnomer, requiring to be 
explained, because calculated to mislead. The language in ques- 
tion is all that its name suggests, Greek, in respect of its voca- 
bulary and accidence, to some extent even in its syntax, but dis- 
tinguished from the ancient by its reflecting exactly those ideas 
and modes of thought which, constituting the common stock of 
modern civilisation, tend to assimilate all modern languages, so 
that phrase answers to phrase, and word to word, in them more 
exactly than is found to be the case in translating from an ancient 
into a modern dialect. 

At Constantinople, Smyrna, and Corfu, no less than at Athens, 
newspapers, almanacs, school-books, in short, all literary produc- 
tions, not excepting the most ephemeral, as hand-bills, intended 
for general circulation, are now printed in Modern Greek, as 
distinguished from Romaic. If only in free Greece and in the 
Ionian islands this cultivated dialect is heard in the senate and 
at the bar, it is everywhere heard from the pulpit ; if only in 
Athens it is the vehicle of professorial instruction, it is the medium 
of the schoolmaster's humbler tuition wherever a Greek commu- 
nity exists. 

As for the term I>a/xo/, which through the Latin has passed 
into the languages of Europe, it was never a universally admit- 
ted national designation among the ancient Greeks, and owes its 
acceptance by those of later times to its currency among all 
other Europeans, and to the proscription under which the desig- 
nation EXtojveg was laid by the Greeks of the middle ages, in con- 
sequence of its suggesting the idolatry of their ancestors. Now 



4 GENERAL REMARKS. 

that the prouder appellation "EXXrivsg has been restored, and that 
the Ciceronian diminutive grceculi is suggested to every scholar 
by Tpaizoi, this latter term has fallen into universal disrepute. 

The distinction between Romaic and Modern Greek requires 
to be insisted on, as it is not recognised by British scholars in 
general, and is systematically ignored by a few Greeks, or rather, 
to speak within my own knowledge, by one. This distinguished 
individual is M. Sophocles, professor of Greek in Cambridge 
(U. S.) University, and author of a Romaic Grammar, published 
in 1842, a most valuable auxiliary to the English student of 
Romaic, properly so called. 1 In his preface to this work, M. 
Sophocles says of " Romaic, or, as it is often called, Modern v 
Greek," thus confounding the two : — "It may with propriety be 
said to bear the same relation to the Greek, that is, the language 
of the ancient Greeks, that the Italian bears to the Latin." The 
testimony of a Greek concerning the living language of his coun- 
trymen will not be considered as necessarily conclusive by any 
one acquainted with Greek literary partizanship. In the following 
pages no attempt is made to conceal either the internal dissolu- 
tion of ancient Greek, or its admixture with foreign elements, as 
these appear in the Romaic dialects ; but however nearly, N in 
regard to them, the judgment of M. Sophocles may approach 
the truth, in regard to Modern Greek, it is a glaring mistake. 
As his grammar, being written in English, has probably in- 
fluenced the opinions of British scholars, I shall borrow two 
examples from his own Chrestomathy, one of Romaic, properly 
so called (see p. 18), and another, of Modern Greek (see p. 41), 
and the reader will thus have an opportunity of judging, from 
his own specimens, whether or not M. Sophocles has confounded 
things that differ. 

The difference between Romaic and Modern Greek cannot be 
better represented in brief than by that which exists between 
broad Scotch and good English. There are phrases in the one 
unknown to the other, like the famous neffow d > glaur, which all the 

1 Prefixed to Ducange's Lexicon of Mediaeval Greek is a succinct Romaic 
grammar, the basis, I presume, of most subsequent ones. This honour is 
ascribed by M. Minoidas Mynas (see p. 44 of the preface to his " Theorie de 
la Grammaire, et de la langue Grecque") to another Romaic grammar, pub- 
lished at Paris in 1709, by a missionary, Thomas Parisinus. 



GENERAL REMARKS. 

English of George IV., and his boasted knowledge of Scotch to 
boot, were unable to explain : the truncation and fusion of words, 
incident to all merely colloquial dialects, and prevalent in the 
one, are rejected by the other : the one is subdivided into innu- 
merable varieties, under the tyranny of local influences; the 
other triumphs over provincialism, and varies, not according to 
the birthplace, but according to the education of him who uses 
it : the one has no literature except proverbs and popular poetry; 
the other is the vehicle of all knowledge to an entire people : 
and just as in Scotland the educated recur to the vulgar dialect, 
for the sake of intelligibility, when discoursing with the illiterate, 
and, in certain circumstances, even when discoursing with one 
another, to avoid the appearance of affectation, or for the sake 
of forcible, familiar, or comical expressions ; so in Greece, where 
Romaic is still the language of the nursery and the playground, 
and where, from the rarity of preaching and the recency of 
schools, the people in general are not yet familiarised with 
Modern Greek, as are the humbler classes in Scotland with 
good English, there is a large admixture of Romaic in the con- 
versational style even of the educated classes. 

Although the Ionian islands have been a British depen- 
dency for nearly forty years, and Modern Greek has made such 
progress even there, where the Romaic dialect is so exceedingly 
corrupt, that in 1852 it supplanted Italian in the administra- 
tion of government and justice, it has not received so much 
public notice in the United Kingdom as on the Continent. 
Since 1828 it-has been publicly taught in Paris, under the 
patronage of Government; and in Germany it has become still 
more extensively known through the connection between the 
court of Athens and those of Bavaria and Oldenburg. Many 
learned Germans speak it fluently, and one of them, Ross, for- 
merly professor in the University of Athens, has enriched its 
literature by a work on Archaeology. In this country, however, 
Modern Greek is still generally held to be a mere euphuism for 
Romaic ; nor is a bare representation of grammatical forms ade- 
quate to remove this impression. The surprise, indeed, with which 
a British scholar marks the coincidence between the grammatical 
paradigms of Modern Greek, as given, for example, by Mr Corpe, 
and those of the ancient Attic, is necessarily mingled with doubt, 



b GENERAL REMARKS. 

and succeeded by questions, which no mere grammar can solve, 
regarding the time and mode of the apparent lingual resurrection. 

It is not pretended that the age of Pericles has returned to 
Greece ; nor will any scholar, whom native good sense or sound 
philosophy has preserved from pedantry, be either surprised or 
displeased that Modern Greek should bear the unequivocal 
stamp of the nineteenth century, to which it belongs. French 
has changed in spite of the Academy's dictionary : when certain 
patriotic Germans combined against the Gallicisms which had 
crept into the vaterldndische Sprache, it was found that the 
famose Kerle and deliciose Bursche could not be expelled ; and 
whoever compares the present features of any living language 
with those it bore three or four centuries ago, will learn how 
wide are the limits within wdiich a language may vary without 
losing its identity. Greek, instead of being an exception to the 
general rule, is its most signal example ; for no other language 
possessed originally so great wealth of grammatical forms and 
syntactical arrangements, nor has any other suffered 2000 years 
of decline, and yet survived : in other words, the vulnerable 
points were more numerous, and the period of time, during which 
the work of degradation went on, has been longer in the case of 
Greek than of any other. In regard to such a language espe- 
cially, it is preposterous to set up a grammatical decalogue, to 
which nothing may at any time be added, and from which 
nothing may at any time be taken away. It is conceded that a 
great change has passed upon Greek ; nay, that whoever, for the 
purpose of solecism hunting, should apply the Attic standard to 
Modern Greek, might commit a slaughter, but could not find 
sport, so abundant is the game : but such a one is invited to test 
his system of lingual uniformity throughout all ages, by apply- 
ing it to the earliest as well as to the latest specimens of Greek. 
He will then be seen taking Homer himself rudely to task, after 
the example of Theodorus, a famous grammarian of the 15th 
century, who enriched his chapter on solecisms with nearly 
thirty examples, five-sixths of which he found in the Iliad and 
Odyssey ! 

When several things really different have long been included 
under one name, the implied diversity is often lost sight of, and 
the common designation interpreted partially, each man putting 



GENERAL REMARKS. 7 

the part he knows best for the whole. How many, for example, 
interpreting Protestantism, describe merely their own sect, pre- 
suming unity in the thing from unity in the name, and that the 
whole resembles their own little part. The same often happens 
with the phrase Ancient Greek, the diversity of dialects, which it 
comprehends but does not suggest, being forgotten, and the 
Attic, as better known than the others, being practically put for 
Ancient Greek in general. From this very cause even Romaic 
is often supposed to differ from Ancient Greek, in particulars 
where it really agrees with one or other of its dialects. How 
many, for example, learning that the rough breathing is 
neglected in the modern pronunciation of the Greeks, cry out 
against the spoliation of the ancient, forgetting how little the 
rough breathing was used in -ZEolic, and that the other ancient 
dialects, by losing the digamma, set the example of delinquency 
in this direction ! How many, hearing one Athenian schoolboy 
say to another on some extraordinarily productive holiday : "E^w 
rpsTg hpa-fcfjjaTg' <r6(tccig zyjig £<rv, would signalise the lamentable 
confusion of the accusative with the dative, forgetting that the 
same existed once more in the 2Eolic ! How many, in convers- 
ing with modern Greeks, are scandalised at first by their constant 
use of %a[Mw in the sense of ^o/w, not recollecting that line of 
Homer (Iliad IV. 187)— 

" Zoj'jja rs xcci [*.irpr\ rqv yaX%riig '% a (Jj o v avdpeg.' 
The belt of mail which braziers made. 

But although neither Romaic nor Modern Greek could derive 
any special illustrations from the non- Attic dialects of antiquity, 
I should still appeal to the reader, with tables of the ancient dia- 
lects before him, and observing how much they differ from one 
another in accentuation and orthography, and consequently in 
pronunciation, in grammatical forms, and even in their vocabu- 
laries, whether a narrow and churlish criticism be not peculiarly 
out of place in respect to Greek. 

Be it remembered, also, that the ancient dialects differed not 
only from one another, but from themselves at different epochs, 
as the student knows to his cost in passing from the writers of one 
age to those of another. No strange demand, therefore, is made 
by Modern Greek, when it claims to be recognised as a dialect or 



8 ROMAIC. 

modification of the Greek language. Its vocabulary contains 
few words which have not a classic parentage, and most of them 
are genuinely Greek, both in form and signification ; whilst the 
novelties which its vocabulary has admitted, as also the approxi- 
mation of its structure to that of modern languages in general, 
prove only that it is not the pet invention of a few learned men, 
but the genuine expression of changes in the language, which 
have always run parallel with the fortunes of the nation. 

A distinct general notion of how Modern Greek arose, can j 
be given in few words. It is a compromise between Ancient [ 
Greek and Romaic brought about by the necessity of communi- 
cating to a people, no longer understanding the former, a mass 
and variety of knowledge which the latter could not convey. \ 
Hence it preserved as much of Romaic as was required by in- 
telligibility, and admitted as much of Ancient Greek as was 
consistent with the same prime exigency. The very artifice ; 
which was employed in England to facilitate the amalgamation 
of Anglo-Saxon with Norman French is employed now in Greece ; 
thousands of ancient words and phrases passing into the popular 
vocabulary by being coupled with their Romaic synonymes, after 
the exact type of the often-quoted " assemble and meet together" 
in the English prayer book. It maybe added that, the elements 
to be fused in Modern Greek being cognate, it possessed from (/ 
the beginning a homogeneity which never could result from the 
amalgamation of Anglo-Saxon and Norman French, and that, 
from the infinite superiority of the one element over the other, 
it recedes, as education is diffused, from Romaic, and advances 
towards the ancient model. 



PART II.— ROMAIC. 

The variety of dialects included under the term Romaic is 
very great. Ducange, in § 9 of the preface to his Lexicon of 
Mediaeval Greek, mentions that Symeon Cabasilas numbered 
seventy in his time. Villoison, who accompanied the French 
ambassador to Constantinople in 1785, and afterwards visited 
Mount Athos and the Greek islands, enumerated seventy-two, 
in imitation, perhaps, of Clemens Alexandrinus, according to 



eomaic. y 

whom seventy-two languages arose upon the dispersion of man- 
kind. Kodrikas in his MjXsr»j ryji %oivr\g * EXXrjv i%y\g diotXsTtrov, pub- 
lished at Paris in 1818, justly remarks that the number seventy- 
two is, on the one hand, too small to include all merely topical 
dialects, and, on the other, too large for those having grand 
characteristics in common. He divides the Romaic dialects into 
twelve; but the most intelligible classification is that which, 
taking the element of corruption for its principle, divides them 
into three, viz., those of the islands, corrupted with Italian, those 
in the Peloponnesus, Macedonia, Thessaly, and Epirus, corrupted 
with Sclavonic, and those of Thrace and Asia Minor, corrupted 
with Turkish. These dialects differ from each other in their 
vocabularies, accidence, and pronunciation to such an extent 
that, were a Peloponnesian peasant to meet one from the shores 
of the Black Sea, much of their discourse would be mutually 
unintelligible. Details on such a subject would consequently be 
endless as well as frivolous ; but the following general remarks 
will suffice to show what a ruin of Ancient Greek these dialects 
present. 

The vocabularies of them all are not only corrupt, as having 
borrowed more or less from the languages of European and Asi- 
atic conquerors, but poor, as being determined by the few wants 
and ideas of an illiterate peasantry. E. G., having frequently heard 
tiropa in the mouths of the common people at Athens, but never 
csroparog, I asked an intelligent Greek what was the Romaic 
genitive of <rro>«, and he answered that it had none. 1 I then 
asked how the peasants would say rb roZ grofiarog peyedos, to 
which he answered that Romaic contained few such general- 
izations, and in the present instance could express only the con- 
crete ; i.e., e%e/ rb arofia fisya\o(v) — he has a big mouth. This 
statement I afterwards found to be correct, and it thus appears 
that the Romaic dialects, by possessing few abstract terms, have 
one grand characteristic in common with those of barbarous tribes 
in general ; for as water can never rise above its source, so the lan- 
guage of a people can never rise above their sphere of thought. 

In respect to the pronunciation of Romaic, I shall only ob- 

1 On further inquiry I found that (rro^ccrou, as if from a new nominative 
ff<rofixrov f is the Romaic genitive of erbpa. ; but it is little used. See p. 11. 



10 ROMAIC. 

serve that, as it disregards quantity altogether, so its accentua- 
tion is not amenable to the ancient canons. In many cases the 
misaccentuation arises from a tendency to preserve the place of 
the accent unchanged throughout all the inflections of a word : 
thus, Romaic has Qdwrog, Qdvarou, instead of Qavdrov, and <pp6vt/j,ri 
for the feminine of (ppovi^og, instead of <ppovi^n according to the 
analogy of classic accentuation, or ppovi^og according to classic 
usage. But no rule can be given ; for, whereas Romaic says 
avOpuvrog, avQpwxov, and ayysXog, ayysXov, preserving the place of 
the accent in the genitive, notwithstanding the change of quantity 
in the final syllable, in the nominative plural it makes avfyw-ro/ and 
dyysXoi, moving forward the accent, though the last syllable re- 
mains short. The place of the accent is frequently affected by 
the synizesis of two vowel-sounds, Romaic being particularly 
fond of this contraction. Thus in <puria, iraibia, and sT/acg (he 
took), the vowels /« are pronounced in one syllable, like ya in 
yard, so that i-T/atrs becomes a trisyllable, and is pronounced 
sV/atfs, whilst, in the other two words, / being as truly a consonant 
as y is in yard, the accent necessarily falls on the final «, and the 
words are pronounced and written pwr/a, ncuhtd. The rough 
breathing is frequently replaced by y, as ydi^a for «//*/« : and 
this 7, being frequently inserted in the middle of words, to pre- 
vent the hiatus where two vowels meet, as in %a/yw, /tXa/yw, 
which are the Romaic forms of xa/w, xXaiu, is justly regarded 
as representing the iEolic digamma. 

What an abridgment of the ancient grammatical forms has 
taken place in Romaic will appear from the following review : — 

1. The perittosyllabic nouns of Ancient Greek have all but 
disappeared ; and that in three ways. First, the accusative 
plural of masculine perittosyllabics has been made the nomina- 
tive of a new noun in the first declension ; so that, instead of o 
dvTjp, 6 yspoov 6 QaffiXzvg, Romaic has o avdpag, 6 yspovrag, 6 QatiiXsdg. 
Secondly, in regard to feminine perittosyllabics their accusative 
singular, when ending in a, has been adopted as the nomina- 
tive of a new noun also in the first declension ; so that, instead 
of y, ywrj, i] (irirrip, 7] dvydrqp, Romaic has h yvva/Tca, rj /Aqrepa 7) 
duyarzpu. Thirdly, and most frequently of all, in regard to 
perittosyllabics of whatever gender, diminutives in iov 7 formed 



ROMAIC. 11 

from the root, have supplanted their primitives, a process which, 
besides that it is in strict accordance with classic analogy, the 
following list will sufficiently explain : — 

From cit%, d>ybg, Romaic has aiytdiov, *yihi(ov) 

„ o<pis 9 opog, „ „ byihiov, '<pidi(ov) 

„ 'iyX sXv $% bX&ws, » » lyyiXiov, %eX/(oi/) 

„ aridtov, uydovog, „ „ dr}d6vi(ov) 

n %*k> yj>?K » » x*P'( 0V ) 

„ <7rovg, tfodbg, „ „ voddpi^ov) 

„ odoijg, odovrog, „ „ odovnov, 9 d6vn(ov) 

„ xoppa, xopfictrog „ „ xofifid,Ti(ov) x 

Many nouns in ug of the first declension have a perittosyllabic 
plural, as -^apag — a fisherman, plural -^apddsg, or ^apddaig, e and 
«/ being pronounced alike by the moderns ; but the only nouns, 
claiming a perittosyllabic genitive singular, are a few neuters in 
a, as urofia, sojfia, which make trofidrov, tupdrov, and a class of 
verbals unknown to Ancient Greek, as 

ypd-^ifj^ov, ypa-^i/J^arog Writing. 

'pd-^/'Aov, ' pa-^i/jyarog sewing. 

■/.Xd^i/Aov '/.Xcc-^i ijjarog weeping. 

However, I never myself heard these perittosyllablic genitives 
from the mouths of the people, and several native Greeks have 
made to me the same acknowledgment. 2 As for a very few 
feminines in tg, as woktg, yvuatg, ydpig^ their Romaic genitive does 
not differ from the nominative, except, indeed, when the final s 
is dropped in the nominative itself. In the AwtonxA "Atpara, of 
Zampelius, h itoki 3 is met with for h *6\ig, so that this noun might 

1 For the reason of these parentheses enclosing the last syllables, see p. 13. 

2 Many nouns are in fact undeclined by the people, in illustration of which 
I may be allowed an anecdote. When the steamer in which I returned from 
Greece was opposite Megara, a well educated Greek remarked for my infor- 
mation that a well is still called <pgU% by the Megaraeans, and not Tnydh(ov) 
as elsewhere ; upon which I asked how the Megaraeans formed the genitive 
of <pg£«g. After some hesitation he answered, that he was sure they did not 
say (pharos, and supposed they used -rvyc&biov, as do the common people else- 
where. It is just as likely, however, that the Megaraeans dispense with the 
genitive, that is, with a separate desinence for the genitive altogether. 

3 Some names of places admitted into our geographies as Tripoli, Napoli, 
are really Romaic nominatives of this kind from Tg/voXis, "SU^oXts ; or Romaic 
accusatives, for, as will be afterwards remarked, the final » of TfaoXiv, titccvo^iv 
is not pronounced in Romaic. 



1 2 ROMAIC. 

be written as of the first declension, h voXri, rrjg vbXyg, i and n being 
pronounced exactly alike. But then, in the same collection of 
popular songs, occurs y yns for h yy, where the nominative, in- 
stead of dropping its own g, as in the case of voXig, assumes that 
of the genitive ; which leads me to remark that, notwithstanding 
a general tendency to regularity in its declensions, Romaic, by 
the endless anomalies that appear on a minute examination, sets 
all grammar at defiance. A broad and striking fact, however, is 
contained in the statement that the perittosyllabic nouns of 
Ancient Greek have all but disappeared from Romaic. 

For the means by which this change has been effected, prece- 
dents of considerable or even high antiquity can be adduced. 
The use of diminutives in form, not in sense, is characteristic of 
all popular dialects, witness the housie, wifie, burnie, boatie, etc., 
of Scottish poetry ; and scholars may become more tolerant of 
their prevalence in Romaic, by considering how they abound in 
the ancient comedies, particularly in the '.E/^vjj of Aristophanes. 
Then again, Suidas gives not only skip but Meipa, and Hesychius 
not only Mryp, but wrupa ; in both which cases a new nomina- 
tive in the first declension seems to have been formed from the 
accusative singular of a feminine perittosyllabic. In line 71 of 
the Homeric Hymn to Venus (No. 4 in Matthias' edition, 
Leipsic, 1805) — 

ii " Apxroi vraphaXiig rz 6oa) vpoxdduv axoprjro" 

irpoxahw cannot be from icpV^, vpox.bg, but from vpoxag, vpoxadog : 
that is, the accusative plural of ^pog has been assumed as a new 
nominative singular. 

That, in the most Ancient Greek, perittosyllabics existed some- 
times under the isosyllabic form also, appears from the following 
examples : — 

spog, zgov, in Iliad I. 469 for tgug, iourog 

xsufyxbg, xzu&ftov, „ „ XIII. 28 „ x.sv6/^ojv -uvog 

/xugrvgog, ftaorvgov Odyss. XVI. 423 „ /xdorvg -vgog 
ysXog, yeXov „ „ XX. 346 „ y'sXwg, y'eXuroS 

Singularly enough, Romaic contains some anomalies of a like 
nature, as cigzos, dguxog, y'egog, XH ^ ^ or "£X m > h** uv > yh m f 
X^ uv ' 



ROMAIC. 13 

2. From the loss of the dative, and the non-pronunciation of 
the final v in the accusative, Romaic nouns, excepting those in 
og, ov, have, like English substantives, only one distinction of 
case in either number. 

To avoid the humming sound of the final v, Romaic sometimes 
assumes after it an f, but oftener, particularly in the case of neuters, 
rejects it altogether, saying, e.g., J^Xo for ^vXov, and /a/x^o for 
pixgov. The only instances of such omission, in classic Greek, are 
furnished by the article and some pronouns; for, according to 
analogy, the neuters rb, o, uvrb, rovro, exeTvo, aXXo must originally 
have been rh, ov, avrhv, rovrov, exetvov, aXXov. That, however, which 
was exceptional in Ancient Greek, is characteristic of Romaic. 
Hence the transformation which diminutives in tov have under- 
gone, V& { ov )> V^' ( ov ) etc., (see p. 11) being pronounced and 
written V&> V^' e tc. First iov was contracted into <e, as it is 
still pronounced in Cyprus, and as it is found written in inscrip- 
tions of the 2d and 3d centuries; 1 and then the final v was 
dropped according to the prevalent Romaic pronunciation. 

The final v, characteristic of the accusative singular in isosyl- 
labics, having been dropped, that case remained undistinguishable 
in Romaic pronunciation from the dative ; and this circumstance, 
as also the identity of these cases in the -ZEolic plural of the first 
declension, which form Romaic has preserved, may partly account 
for the loss of the dative. Some consider that Romaic has pre- 
served the dative in such phrases as klay^iri, vfog rovroig, but 
these remains of the dative are in Romaic mere adverbial expres- 
sions. 

The dative, then, being left out of consideration, it is evident, 
even from the ancient declensions, that neuters have only one 
distinction of case in either number ; and as respects other 
Romaic nouns, excepting always those in og, ov, the same will 
appear to be the case from the following paradigms : — 

Sing, rifiep-u rifb-r) ysgovr-ag rs^v/r-Jjg 

-ag -rig -a -n 

-a(v) -r)(v) -a(i/) -n(v) 

1 See Nos. 506, 704 of Boekh's collection, where Ixiv^iv and <pik9ip*riv 
occur instead of Ixsutipiov, and tptXri^antv. 



14 





ROMAIC. 






tipep-a 


Tl^-i) 


y'epovT-a 


riyniit-yi 


L\ -cut 


-aTg 




-ddaig 


-aig 


-oov 


-S)V 




-ddojv 


"UV 


-aig 


-aTg 




-ddaig 


-aig 


-aig 


-aTg 




-ddaig 


-aig 



All mention of the dual is omitted, because it is wanting in 
Romaic, as it was also in the iEolic dialect. 

3. The genders of Romaic nouns are not far from being 
merged into one prevailing neuter. This result is owing to the 
invasion of diminutives in /oi/, which have supplanted isosylla- 
bic as well as perittosyllabic masculines and feminines. Of the 
latter examples may be found in p. 11, and, of the former, let 
these suffice, %aga£/(ov) from xdgaGog, rv^ov) from rvfog, ff«jyaS/(oi>) 
from *ny*i, and xz<pd\i(ov) from xspaX^. Sometimes even without the 
form of a diminutive, the neuter termination is assumed; as 
Qovvb(v) instead of &ow6g. 

4. The adjectives in Romaic affect, both in declension and 
comparison, a greater regularity than in ancient Greek. Thus, 
instead of peyag, psydXri, p'eya, Romaic has fttydXog, ^zyd\% 
fiisyd\o(v). Again, such adjectives as ppovi^og, hdo%og, which in 
Ancient Greek do not distinguish the feminine from the mascu- 
line, assume in Romaic the proper feminine termination <pp6vi^rj, 
jvdofy. This n is the Romaic termination for the feminine even 
of adjectives in pog and og pure. Thus, instead of^izpog fuxpd, pixpbv, 
and tfaXaibg, ira~kaid 9 KaXaibv, it makes fimpbg, fiixprj, /xixpb(i), 
and rfaXatbg, KaXaifj, *iraXcuo(y) ?■ In comparisons, Romaic has 
peyaXJjrepog instead of /mi%w, xaXyfspog is more common than 
xaXXtav; and for x s 'P uv ^ has yjiponpog which Homer himself 
uses in Iliad XX. 513. Romaic also frequently forms the 
comparative by prefixing irXsov to the positive, and it constantly 
uses the article with the comparative instead of the superlative, 
resembling in both these respects Italian and French. 

5. The pronouns also affect greater regularity in Romaic than 
in Ancient Greek. Thus, instead of ovrog, avT?i, rovro, Romaic 

1 As a farther example of the Romaic predilection for regularity in declen- 
sions, it may be mentioned that those feminine nouns in « which in classic 
Greek make the genitive in >??, preserve the vowel of the nominative through- 
out the oblique cases : thus Romaic has h Vo%u., rns h%as, not rns loins. 



ROMAIC. 15 

has rourog, rolrri, tovto, and similarly in the nominative plural. 
But the most singular instance is in the second personal pro- 
noun, asTg, Gag, <r«g, being the Romaic substitutes for v^e?g, vp,Zv 9 
v/xdg- Whence these forms <«/£, tag ? The dual of Gv was <r<pu> ; 
Homer (II. X. 398) uses tfp/ovvfor bfriv; and Herodotus (III. 71) 
Gp'eag for v/jAg. It is therefore highly probable that GsTg, Gag y and 
with the digamma <r<pe?g, Gpag, which the ancients ultimately used 
for the plural of the third personal pronoun, are more ancient, 
as they are also more regular plurals of gv, g\ than vjusTg, vp&g, 
the very anomalousness of which betrays a later origin. The 
genitive plural of all nouns, adjectives, and pronouns in og and 
ov, coincides in Romaic pronunciation with the accusative singu- 
lar, and is, probably on this account, much seldomer used than 
the genitive singular, which coincides with no other case. In 
accordance with this general observation, whereas Romaic has 
'fiov, gov for the genitives singular of eyu, tf), it has no special form 
for their genitives plural, and employs the accusative instead. In 
like manner rovg is used for ruv 9 masc. fern, and neuter, when 
tojv represents the pronoun of the third person. Thus, oar hands, 
your hands, their hands, would be expressed in Romaic, rd yjpid 
[lag, rd ysptd Gag, rd yjpia rovg, 

6. Indeclinability, the natural result and ultimate term of 
diminishing and confounding grammatical inflections, has been 
actually reached by Romaic in some instances. Ancient Greek 
had the indeclinable 8s?va, for which Romaic uses rads, prefixing 
the article as the ancients prefixed it to htm. But, besides this, 
Romaic has %dh — every ; %ar/ — some ; and okov, or vou — who, 
which, that, all indeclinable. Although this relative onoZ is dis- 
tinguished by its accentuation from the adverb ovov — where, yet 
it is probably derived from this latter, just as the English rela- 
tive who is derived from the German too — where, used still by the 
vulgar in some parts of Germany for the proper relative welcher. 
The same fate has befallen the present participle, the only 
active participle preserved in Romaic, all its ancient inflections 
being represented by the accusative plural masculine. 1 The 

1 The reader will notice the accordance of this fact with the alleged dis- 
appearance of all perittosyllabics from Romaic, and with the mode of their 
disappearance as described in p. 10. The state of the passive participles in 
Romaic is another confirmation. Although the aorist tense has been pre- 



1 G ROMAIC. 

interrogation ri is almost in the same state, for Romaic has ri 
wpa — what o'clock; ri yvmixuig — what women; and ri avQpuvoi 
— what men, indifferently. But for this an ancient precedent is 
alleged in the r& ri for ra rim of Aristophanes ('E/^vjj. 693). 

7. With respect to verbs, the conjugation in fit has been lost, 6eru 
being used for rlOy/u, &<phu for #£%*/, and so on in other cases. 
Many verbs preserve the middle sense, but none the future and 
aorists middle, the only tenses peculiar to that voice ; the entire 
optative and infinitive moods have been lost ; of the imperative 
only the second persons remain ; the subjunctive is frequently 
confounded with the indicative ; and, in the general ruin of the 
ancient verb, the only tenses saved are the present, imperfect, 
and aorist, active and passive. 

The total loss of the optative and infinitive, and the frequent 
use of the indicative for the subjunctive in Romaic, are perhaps 
partly owing to the obliteration of whatever difference once 
existed between s/, »», and o/ in pronunciation. Whoever looks 
through the paradigm of rucrrw, remembering that et of the indi- 
cative and infinitive, n of the subjunctive, and ot of the optative, 
nearly 2000 years ago, came to be sounded alike by the Greeks, 
all of them as ee in see, and notices how often the corresponding 
parts in these four moods thus pronounced sound alike to the 
ear, the only guide of an illiterate people, will give its due weight 
to this suggestion. Romaic contains many examples of what 
strange metamorphoses the ear permits when unguided by a 
knowledge of letters. Thus, supposing v of the article in rr>v 
"rdpav to belong to the proper name, the people now call "Ydpcc, 
Nvdpu ; so also they say N/xap/a for 'l%ap/a, and N/og for "log. The 
same corruption appears in some common nouns, as vQpog for 
w/U/og, and votxoxvpig (a householder) for 6ixoxvpt(o)g i examples which 
recall Homer's vqdvpog for tjdvfiog (II. II. 2.) Proceeding on a 
contrary supposition, i.e., supposing that the initial N of the 
proper name really belonged to the article prefixed, the people 
have made 'Ag/a, and "Evaxrog out of Nagog and THa&nuxrog. A 
similar illustration is afforded by the whole class of Romaic verbs 



served in the indicative and subjunctive moods, yet the aorist participle, as 
perittosyllabic, has been lost ; whereas, although the perfect indicative passive 
has been lost, its participle, being isosjllabic, remains. 



ROMAIC. 17 

beginning with Be, which is the Romaic equivalent of the initial 
un in compound English verbs. Thus xoXku, or rather in Romaic 
koXvUj means to glue, and hence JaxoXXa came to mean the con- 
trary, i.e., to unglue ; but since, in the aorist — the narrative tense, 
and consequently the one most used — exjtoWZ became e%ex,6\\f}(ta 9 
Romaic, taking the initial a for the augment, formed a new pre- 
sent indicative from the aorist, viz., %exo\\u, or rather %sxo\vui. 
Thus also Zfbyw — I yoke, and £a£euyw — I unyoke, etc. 

What substitutes Romaic has found for the lost moods and tenses, 
as also how far its formation of the tenses saved differs from the 
ancient model, will be more particularly explained in notes to the 
Romaic extracts subjoined. Suffice it to say, in general, here, 
that the lost tenses are expressed by means of c%w, 6'sXw, and 
slpon (I am), used as auxiliaries, and that when, in the formation 
of a tense preserved, Romaic differs from the ancient model, it 
often does so to avoid an irregularity which classic Greek had 
sanctioned. Thus, instead of ypa-^ov in the first aorist imperative 
active, Romaic has ypa-vf/s ; and instead of ypa<pp in the second per- 
son singular of the present indicative passive, ypdtpstai, which is no 
doubt the more ancient form. The want of the infinitive is 
supplied by va Qva) with the subjunctive, and that of the opta- 
tive in its proper optative sense, by e/0a va y or a/x-rrors i/«, also 
with the subjunctive. Wherever let occurs in the English im- 
perative, Romaic uses «>, a corruption of ty*€ f with the subjunc- 
tive. But the most remarkable of all the particles, used in the 
formation of Romaic tenses, is 6a or 6s »«, which, also prefixed to 
the subjunctive, expresses the future. In Chios at the present 
day 6s\si is vulgarly pronounced 6e, so that 6s v& } or 6a repre- 
sents 6sXsi /W, by which, and a tense of the subjunctive, the 
ancient future had first been resolved. This 6a with the imper- 
fect is equivalent to the conditional particle ol* in classic Greek ; 
thus 6a r\to — it would be. 

The accidence of ancient Greek having been thus truncated 
and broken up in Romaic, it necessarily follows that its syntactical 
arrangements are exceedingly simple. The most singular peculi- 
arity is the use of the genitive for the ancient dative after verbs of 
declaring, giving and taking away, as f^ov sT-rrs instead of fioi tlm. 
The few ancient prepositions preserved all govern the accusative ; 
avb, I/?, and fte, which is a truncation of ftsra, are those most 

B 



18 KOMATC. 

frequently used, and correspond to the French de, a, and avec 
respectively. 

After all these deductions the reader will perhaps be surprised 
to find the Greek type so very recognisable in the following 
Romaic proverbs, taken from M. Sophocles' Chrestomathy, 
p. 156. 

1. K«>^ slvai 1 t\ vv(p7) (vv/Mpri) 1. Ours is a bonnie bride, 
pctg, ftovov sfvoti (trpaZf,. only she squints. 

2. KdXXtov sWg 2 (ppovifLoc l%- 2. Better a wise enemy than 
dpbg iea,p&* evag fyvpXbg <pi\og. a foolish friend. 

3. 'O/ koWo) xapaZoxvpuToi 3. Too many captains founder 
wviyovv* rb %apu£i. the ship. 

1 The present indicative of the Romaic substantive verb is formed as in 
tiftai the margin, on the type of xs<>«/, except in the third person singular of 
tlrrxt both numbers. That hvai should be both singular and plural is no 
ilvui greater blemish in Romaic than was in ancient Greek the identity of 
hpiSa. the first person singular and third person plural in the imperfect active 
h<rh of verbs in &>. This hvai is very like the Doric hi for \<tri or the 
hvai Ionic hi, which stood for both hum and hurt. In the compounds hm 
— some, i.e., hi oi — there are who, and hipn — sometimes, i.e., hi on — there 
are (times) when, hi is used in the simple substantive sense, as it also is by 
Herodotus (viii. 55), where, speaking of the temple of Erechtheus, he says, 
lv re? iXain « xki 6a.xccff<ru..'ivi. In Romaic the last word of this phrase would 
be written hvai. But it was not always so written ; in Ptochoprodromos it 
occurs under the forms hi, hi, hsv, h ; afterwards it was written hat, and the 
form hi is still preserved on the shores of the Black Sea, and in some islands. 
The only remnant of the classic hp) is in the rU h, by which the military 
guard in Greece addresses the passer-by after nightfall, and to which must 
be answered *«Xas- 

8 "Eva s stands for us, and is probably more like the primitive form of the 
cardinal unit ; how else can the oblique cases be accounted for, and the Latin 
unus ? It is the Romaic indefinite article ; and, as in the Hellenistic dialect, 
is often equivalent to the indefinite *•/?. See Mat. viii. 19 : xix. 16. 

3 The classical reader will be shocked to find ar«g* construed with the nomi- 
native, instead of the accusative, according to classic usage, after comparatives. 
Nevertheless Aristotle uses «•*£«, which Romaic could not be expected to keep dis- 
tinct from 5r«£«, instead of «. In his Treatise on Plants, book ii. ch. 2, towards 

the end of it, is the phrase, xxvrivhv not.) xv^iurtgov o-'Jf*£i£r,xz rZ vlari to iivui froi%stai 

«r«go -r»5 y»f. This -r^o is no doubt vag o, to which <**( o, ti corresponds in 
Modern Greek. Romaic has also •xa.^ov, which is perhaps a mispronunciation 
of «r«g«, since many say narov for x«™, and so on. 

* -rviyow for Wiyovsu, a Romaic contraction not more violent than the ancient 
one of fJW* into Cuv in the optative of l^i, and possessing the same recom- 



ROMAIC. 19 

4. 'O didZoAog 'yidia dsv 1 e^e/, 4. The devil has no goats, 
Ttai rupi iirovhii (sVwAeg). yet he sold cheese. 

5. 'E/s xpe/AatyMvov 3 ff^irt 4 5. In the house of the hanged 
c/oiv} fjbrjv 5 avapepi/s. don't mention a rope. 

6. "AXoyov birou <sov xapffyw, 6. Don't look at the teeth of 

hg to. 'dovna, /m^v rb C\e<z"/)g. a gift horse. 

7. Kdde Ysvryjg (Ysuarqg) 'iyj-i 7. Every liar has also his 
xai rbv [A&prvpa rov. witness. 

8. "Onoiog (oGrig) jcatj fie rb 8. Whoever has been burnt 
Zf(trh 9 tpvadsi xai rb xpvov. with the hot, blows the cold too. 

9. nirctv hvoxi dh rpuiyug, r) 9. What need you mind, if the 
a' swo/u^si av xafcrai ; pie you don't eat should be burnt? 

10. "Evag rpsXbg pyjx vSl (p'Vre/) 10. A fool throws a stone 
rvjv Terpav V rb leqyabi) x exurbv into the well, and a hun- 

mendation, that, namely, of diminishing the sibilant sounds, which in Greek, 
as in English, are rather abundant. Romaic uses this termination, ««», for 
afiv of the subjunctive as well as for ovtiv of the indicative. 

1 $h, not, is a truncation of hvhh, which even classic writers sometimes 
used adverbially instead of xut hvVtv, like the English nothing in the phrase 
u nothing loath." In the extracts given at pp. 43, 44, huhh will be found fre- 
quently used for $«'». 

2 its, for b, occurs in the lower Alexandrian Greek. See Luke i. 20 ; 
xi. 7. 

3 Romaic uniformly neglects the reduplication in the perfect participle pas- 
sive. 

4 *•«•/«, W/r«(v), l<r*iriov y from the Latin hospitium. Every one knows 
that Latin words were no strangers to the Alexandrian dialect : witness the 
xyjva-os, xovffruSixj <routd,£iov, <rirXo;, Qgwyikkiov, etc. of the New Testament. 

8 ph, in this and the following proverb, is for pk, which orthography is 
observed in prov. 22. Contrary to the general practice described in p. 13, 
Romaic words sometime assume a final v. Examples will be found below in 
the extract from Ptochoprodromos. Professor Ross heard in Cyprus tovtov 
to cixxov, instead of roZro to &kk«. See his travels in the Greek Islands, vol. iv. 
p. 210. 

6 This truncation of i« before the article has given rise to a whole class of 
Romaic proper names. Professor Ross (vol. i. p. 141 of his Travels) mentions 
a monastery in Seriphos called Steen Vreesin, i.e., '2 t*iv b^vo-iv, because of a 
neighbouring fountain; and (vol. ii. p. 43) a plain in Amorgos called Sto 
Horyo, i.e., '2 to x«^e(»), from there having formerly been a village upon it. 
To this pronunciation Constantinople owes its Turkish name ; for the Turks, 
hearing V r»jv vriki(v), i.e., as it would sound to them, Steembolee frequently 
in the mouths of the Greeks with reference to Constantinople, imagined that 



20 ROMAIC. 

tppovipoi dtv ryjv eQydfyw^ (\xZd\- dred wise men don't take it 

Xovft). OUt. 

11. "o-7rov dxovg (dxovstg) voX- 11. Where you hear of many 
\a zzpdffia, Qdcra (£a<rra£s) xaf cherries, carry there a small 
fuxpo xaXd&i. basket. 

12. Auo yddapo? zfidXomv 5 ug 12. Two donkeys quarrelled 
%'tvriv a%vpwva. in a strange barn. 

13. Msr^a 4 dixot, xcci xoprs, 13. Measure ten, and cut 
(xovrrs) /xiav. one. 

14. 0pe-^s 5 Xvxov rbv yii^a, 14. Feed a wolf in winter, 
vu <rs <pdyr\ rci xaXoxdtpt. he will eat you in summer. 

to be the name, and called it, as they do still, Stamboul. In much the same 
way Bougainville, having asked the natives of Tahiti the name of their island, 
and hearing them say, " O Tahiti," i.e., it is Tahiti, imagined the whole an- 
swer to be the name, and called it Otaheite. 

1 %,i» is a favourite Romaic termination for verbs : thus it has t*X,<» and aXXeiJa 
for ruffa-u and olXXko-o-w ; but even the ancients had <r<p«£« as well as <r<pd,ffo-oj. 

2 Aristotle mentions a fish called «W ; and Athenaeus (book vii. p. 315), 
speaking of it, says, ovo$ ev xaxiovo-i rms yxhov. The Cretans now call a fish, 
which may have been the same, yetiaob-^u^v), i.e., ass-fish. It is therefore 
probable that y*fos was an ancient vulgar name for &»?, and hence the Romaic 

yddago;. 

3 By borrowing terminations from the ancient first aorist, Romaic distin- 
guishes the first person singular from the third person plural of its imperfects. 
For example, I^Xovkv is the third person plural of the imperfect of pxxbvu, 
Ifieixova the tense being inflected as in the margin. The Romaic aorist is 
\u,a,Xons inflected in the same way: hence s>«^e, in prov. 21, instead of 
IpaXovi 'iftadov. This mode of distinguishing the first person singular from 
lf*Kkbvay,iv the third person plural is mentioned by Eustathius, on the autho- 
Ifitxxbvirs rity of Heraclides, as having prevailed in Cilicia. At page 1759 
Iptkovctv of his Commentary on Homer, Eustathius says : K«< k 'exaW^v- 

t$s iv KiXixia. . . . a,vro6d,XXovTts to v, xou [aztoitiUvtis to o ftixgov lis Spa^h clXtpoi 
Wgotpl^ovTcci, sXaSa. XiyovTzg xoti ttpaya,- hoc) tqItk 0*1 tovtojv vrXnGuvTixa., \i; av XyyovTK, 

x'syovo-iv. Koraes asserts that ?iX6a.v, stpvyoiv, zXuSav, iyKa,rzXi<ruv, and the like, 
occur in the Septuagint. 

4 MjT^fij, as from ^.t^kco instead of ^ir^iw ; so in prov. 22 XvtZo-xi, as from 
xwdopxi instead of XvAa^tu. This is the Doric preference of a so conspicuous 
in Romaic. In the island of Kalymnos, a chapel of St Irene is called 'Ayios. 
'igoivei., and IvifAos is pronounced £«>«,-. In like manner, many Romaic participles 
are formed as if from a present in upon ; thus I^a^sva? and hxdpzvo; are used 

fbr lg%b/*svo; and o*t%b(Atvos. 

5 e^i is the aor. imper. for fytyov, a formation of which there are ex- 
amples in Homer, as «?« in Odyss. xx. 481. 

v Oi<rz 6'aiov y^n'v xtittov cixos, 0W1 Ts xu.) ttuo' 



ROMAIC. 



21 



15. When the crows caw, 
the nightingales flee away. 

16. Neither the poor man, 
nor his word. 

17. What the old woman had 
in her mind she saw in her 
dream. 

18. However great you are, 
always seem a little less. 

19. The galled horse trem- 
bles when he sees the saddle. 

20. The wolf delights in the 
storm. 

21. I learned (to go) naked, 
and am ashamed (to go) dressed. 

22. Don't pity the horseman 
(6V/) Kps/xcvrai ra irobdpid because his teet hang. 



15. * Orav XuXouv (XaXojdi) bi 
xopdxoi (xopaxzg), (psvyovv rd 
dqdovia. 

16. ! 'Ours 6 <pru%bg (ftrwyjbg), 
ours 6 Xoyog rou. 

17. "O, rt slys q ypia (ypauz) 
V rov vouv rys, ro 'ZXsits 'g rb 
ovsipov rr\g. 

18. "Otfog slffoci, nuvru (tfdvrri) 



(paivou xGCi xo/jjfjjGtri <7rapaxaru. 

19. To aXoyov 1 rb TrXviy^svov, 
orav tdfj rr\v tfsXav, rpsfisi. 

20. 'O Xuzog 'g rqv dvsfio^dXrjv 
ya'tpirai. 

21. "E/iak yv/J<vbg, z evrp'e- 
'KOfXtCii hh\)(jJkvog. 

22. M-v} Xuvrdaai rov 7L&&aXXdpriv 
noog 
rov. 



23. They honoured the pea- 
sant, and he thought they feared 
him. 

24. (He) wdio is hungry 
dreams of pieces. 

The horse is so called as being the noblest of the 
In like manner, vtruvos, winged, is the Romaic name 



23. Tbv yjj)pidrr\v rbv srijuouffav, 
%' sxs/vog 'dappovos 4 -rajg (ori) rov 
'<poQovvrav. 

24. 'OcroD 'Trsivdsi xo/j J /jbd,ria ovsi- 
psusrai. 

1 clxoyov, irrational, 
domesticated animals, 
for the cock. 

2 •rXy>y&>p'<vo», perf. part, pass., without the reduplication, from *xvyo(v)u, a 
Romaic derivative from <x\vyh. 

3 ffixuv from Latin sella. 

* The Romaic formation of the imperf. indie, of pure verbs is exhibited in 

the tWO Words Irtpovtrxv and ^ceppavfft. 

5 No single word could better illustrate the variety of grammatical forms 

in Romaic than this 'QoZouvrav, since, according to M. Sophocles' grammar (p. 

l<poS— ovvro 64), it might have been written in five different ways, as in the 

— ovvtkv margin. Without going to Greece any one may understand that 

— tovvroiv these various forms are provincialisms ; and that M. Sophocles' 

— iovtccv work consequently appears to his countrymen exactly as would 

— iovvto to an Englishman a grammar exhibiting, along with the English 

of the educated, a collection of the dialectical peculiarities from Land's End 

to John o' Groat's House. The reader will observe that ^appovin and '<poZoZv~n V 

are unaugmented, which is a very frequent omission in Romaic. 



22 ROMAIC- 

25. TLov ^s 1 xa-zin rvyr\\ \ 25. Where are you going, 
rov Y\o\\)nyyWr\ rb ditiri. bad luck ? To the house of 

the genius. 

26. Ticog tuv (uTayovv), xopaxa, 26. How are your children 
rd ntaihid cod ; "Otov <xav, rotsov getting on, crow ? As they get 
p^upi^ow. on, they get blacker. 

27. $>raiyu (nrahi) 6 pdrtrrig, 27. The tailor is at fault, 

xai d'ipvow 2 rbv judyeipav. and they beat the cook. 

28. "Entafc vb -/k\i avb rfy 28. He caught the eel by 
ovpdv. the tail. 

29. &sXsi vd 3 'Qydx-/)(szQdXp) rb 29. He wishes to draw the 
'<piBt dtfb r^v rpvirav /&s rou rpsXov serpent out of its hole with the 
to "xzpi. fool's hand. 

Besides current proverbs like the above, the Klephtic and popu- 
lar songs, where the want of learning in the authors ensures the 
reader against pedantry, may also be depended on as faithfully 
representing the spoken dialects. But the long barbarous poems, 
which form the rest of Romaic literature, having been written 
by men of some education, are all, more or less, in the macaronic 
style, and their evidence, therefore, cannot be implicitly received. 
In the prolegomena to vol. ii. of his "Araxra, Koraes gives a list 
of such poems, beginning with those of Ptochoprodromos (a.d. 
1150), from which, as being the earliest, an extract is subjoined. 



1 ix&yus, vdytis, veins, sr«V. Such transformations are met with in all popu- 
lar dialects. Grammarians tell us that the Tarentines omitted y in the pro- 
nunciation of exiyoi, as do the inhabitants of Rhodes and the neighbouring 
islands to this day. 

2 Vipvow for Vtpovtriv. The iEolic termination pa is a favourite one in Ro- 
maic : thus, instead of <p^« and <r*u£w, it has <pi^a and fri^u. 

3 Here vet with the subjunctive represents the lost infinitive. GEconomos, 
in his work on the pronunciation of Greek, states that the infinitive is still 
preserved in Cyprus, and on the shores of the Black Sea ; and he instances 
«{iv fyi%ai, *£v %iovi<rai, as examples. This, however, may be a mere variety 
in the pronunciation of the subjunctives wg)» Ggs'l?, *£" x, i0V ' lff V' At a H events, 
granting that, in Cyprus and. on the shores of the Black Sea, the infinitive 
survives in certain phrases (as in these same parts the ancient ending of the 
present indie, act. «««(») has been preserved, and even the Doric ii/us for 
ypiv), it is most certainly obsolete in the Romaic dialects generally ; nor 
have they any greater blemish than the constant recurrence of v«, which their 
mode of supplying the want of the infinitive necessitates. 



ROMAIC. 23 

A few words regarding the author are premised to render his 
verses more intelligible, and less uninteresting. 

His personal history is an exemplification of prov. 25 in the 
above collection ; for he was a monkish ffoXyrs^wnjs, who wrote 
on grammar, history, philosophy, astronomy, and theology, and 
that, too, in tolerable Byzantine Greek, yet so poor that he found 
occasion to indite two farcical Romaic poems, one on his poverty, 
or, as he more feelingly calls it, his hunger, and another on his hard 
treatment in the monastery. In the first, he describes not only 
his hunger, but the expedients to which it drove him, and the 
regrets it suggested that he had not been bred a baker, a shoe- 
maker, a street-crier, or, indeed, anything rather than a scholar ; 
and in the second, he describes not only his own hard treatment 
in the monastery, but also the luxury of his superiors, displaying 
an acquaintance with cookery-book nomenclature, which an ac- 
complished gourmet might be proud of, and which tempts us to 
suspect that he was not himself a man to rest contented like a 
good Christian, with the simplest food and raiment. Both these 
complaints are addressed to the 3d Comnenus, and the following 
couplet in honour of that emperor will show that, with all his 
school and kitchen learning, the poor Forerunner did not rise 
above his age, in respect of mental culture and taste. 

"v. 

"Ovrug ruyy^dvug MavovrjX hog iiriyudg rs 
Efifiavov7jX 9 Ha/xCaffiXsv irapd tfapdvra <rsvre. 

" Thus, Manuel, you chance to be a god on earth, 
.Emmanuel, king of kings, excepting forty-five." 

"Sapdvra tsvts is also the present pronunciation of rs&ffapdxovra 
n'svre. This number being written ^ in Greek, and these letters 
inverted and prefixed to MccvovrjX making 'E^avoi^X, the wretched 
and irreverent enigma is explained. 

The following extract is from the poem on his hunger, and 
describes a practical joke. It would appear that the family of 
Ptochoprodromos were as much disappointed as himself at the 
unproductiveness of his learning ; and at length, their disappoint- 
ment having passed into indignation, one day on taking his usual 
place at table, the following scene occurred as if by concert among 
the others : — 



24 ROMAIC. 

'ExsTvoi 8' e^S'x'jjdricfav, Xsyovrsg of/jwcpdovug' 
Ma&bv zatKou dpyaSidfytfs ; rddo bsv 'sysig roirov' 
Ylairag, ypafifiarioi.bg zltial' rpstps rbv savrov Con* 
Mqv CXsV^g, ro dirdoiw fj>ag, 6% shai 6v bid rovro' 
n Av ds tftivag, aydpads^ ypafjjfhartots, oca! (pays. 5 

Tovrwv ds <xpbg /as, Satf/Xsu, dirdvrojv Xeyofisvwv, 
' Oxdri Tuig syivsrov %r ! oitog sig rb zardoytv, 
Kai itdvrsg sijuxw^tfav, s<pvyov wapavriota, 
' EXitiZpvrsg on yjatXd rb (ftf/riv vd roug ffvi<~fi, 
■ 'iloXXa yap r\ro KaXaibv, iravu fctiadpojfAevov. 10 

' Eyco d' oog svpov %s'tfhsvov rb 6v l W7r\svpov dwdoiiv, 
'Hp^dfiqv (SvKkoyiZztiQai, %al hgrbv vovv fbou Xsyw* 
'Ovx eJftf syu rbv sXsyav' ' Ov d/aSp hg Xdpvyyd gov; 
'A XX' "ds rqv dffvyxpirov Qsov <pi}.av9poj7r/av, 
Tlwg birsp Xoyov s<psps r' airdouv hg ifjbhav. 15 

Tavra ds Xsywv, QaG/Xsv, rr\v fid^aipav xparfaag, 
'Hp^dfbriv kfLirov%6vs6&ai, fi»syj>ig sig otopov r]Xdov, 

Ver. 2. Ma.6ov . . . apyctZtxfyffi ; Koraes, from whose "Atuxtk, vol. i. p. 10, 
the text is copied, can make nothing of this phrase. A meaning has been 
supposed to it in the translation. *•«*«, perhaps the Doric rZh, o being often 
substituted for t : thus, fg» is pronounced 3£», and ixfyos, o X 0po S . 

Ver. 3. n*ir«s means a priest, but udTas the pope, rov lavrov <?ov is Ro- 
maic for fficivrov. All the reciprocal pronouns are so formed ; that is to say, 
the genitives of the personal pronouns (the article being used enclitically for 
the pronoun of the third person) are appended to a masculine singular case 
of uuirio, with the article prefixed. 

Ver. 4. a*&xt(J)v 9 of unknown derivation, corresponds with the ancient ty*. 
tia-i, equivalent to foui in the previous line. 

Ver. 7. e o««Ti or »dn, i.e. »&v ri. Romaic has a number of such compounds, 
as *««y, somewhere ; xd*oios, some, in reference to number ; xx^too-os, some, 
in reference to quantity. To all these Ptochoprodromos prefixes », which 
Koraes considers to be »?, in the sense it bears in the Ancient Greek phrase, 
vnis us vpiuxoffiat. Apollonius of Tyre uses lyik vd. for hd vk. and the author of 
the poem entitled History of Alexander the Great, *>? yid vd for the same, a 
comparison giving some probability to Koraes' supposition. See vol. i. of 
'Araxrct, p. 167. lyivzrav and. Ipivxv, in line 15, are examples of the assumed 
final v, according to what is stated in note (5), p. 19. 

Ver. 11. ffvy.'TrXivpov means, together with the adjoining sides or ribs. 

Ver. 13. rov used for the relative, as is rh in the quotation from Homer, 
p. 7, and tv in that from Herodotus, in note (1), p. 18. The article is con- 
stantly so used in 'Epuroxptros {o vccxcctos), that famous Romaic poem, which 
some have called The People's Homer. 



KOMA1C. 25 

M&rd ds ravTa, Catf/XeD, xarw xayol) xaryjXdov, 

Ta^a yvprooov <fvv duroTg nodsv 6 xrvirog 7}\Qsv, 

TIporepov ro xarovdiv /^ag Grrjtfag s'tg to rpairil^iv, 20 

A/a vd '<7rovv on stfoixiv r\ %dra rr\v fy/Aiav. 

"Acravrgg 5k furd fjwtpbv rfj xsKr, ffuvsXOhreg, 

Ka/ rb tarovdtv civwfav idovrzg T7\g rpatf'efyg, 

"Eppi-^av Xi'Qovg /tar' dvrou, Xzyovrzg' <&oveuQ7]roj, 

"On etpayzv rb 6au/jja<frbv a%po<7ratfrov dftdxiv. 25 

The following doggrel lines, being an almost verbatim tran- 
slation, will assist the curious reader in interpreting the above : — 

But, jumping up, they said Avith one accord : 

Why don't you work ? Here is no place for you : 

Now you are priest and scholar, feed yourself, 

Nor look at our rump-piece ; it's not for you : 

But if you're hungry, scholar, buy and eat. 5 

Whilst all these things were said to me, O king, 

Some noise in the groundfloor was made below, 

And all rose up to flee away in haste, 

From suffocation, if the house should fall ; 

For it was very old and rickety. 10 

When thus I found the rump-piece lying rich, 

To think I began, and said in my mind : 

'Twas I they told — your throat it shan't go down ; 

But see the incomparable love of God, 

Bringing the rump-piece wondrously to me! 15 

This said, O king, I caught hold of a knife, 

Began to devour, and filled myself. 

After this, O king, I too went below, 

Mayhap seeking with them whence came the noise ; 



Ver. 17. l[*.xov>ton(r6eii from (Italian) imboccare, 

Ver. 19. yvptvuv, Z,7i<ra>v, from yvpos, a circle, because he who searches in a 
place, goes round and round in it. 

Ver. 20. K»Tovh(o)v, a diminutive from the low Latin, catus ; Kara, in the 
next line is another form of the same. 

Ver. 21. ha being lost to Romaic, vol strengthened by $«* supplies its place, 
just as in Ancient Greek, hort, i.e. , en strengthened by hd, was used for on, 
because, to distinguish it from en, that, ^uv is for u*&nriv, and ?*«««» for 

iiroiynriv. 

Ver. 22. xix-zi, from the Latin, cella. 

Ver. 25. xjcpovrcarrov. vewros anciently meant sprinkled in general, but is 
now applied only to flesh and fish, in the sense of sprinkled with salt. 



2(> ROMAIC. 

But first I set at the table our cat, 20 

That they might ascribe the damage to it. 

Soon all in the pantry gathered again, 

And, seeing the cat high on the table, 

Threw stones at it, saying : Let it be killed, 

Since it ate our wondrous powder'd rump-piece. 25 

The above is probably a fair specimen of the mediaeval scholar's 
off-hand Greek. In several particulars it is distinguished from 
the then vulgar dialect. The reader is not to suppose, for ex- 
ample, because the negative ou is constantly used in the above 
extract, that dsv was unknown in the time of Ptochoprodromos ; 
for it occurs elsewhere in his poems, as do all the more common 
peculiarities of Modern Romaic. Sometimes, indeed, he bar- 
barises beyond Modern Romaic, construing, e.g., ex. and <tw with 
the accusative, whereas Romaic now dispenses with them alto- 
gether. 

In the above and in all criticisms of Romaic, it is compared 
with classic Greek ; but it is now time to observe that this is ' 
unfairly comparing the worst Greek of to-day with the best of 
antiquity. Having inherited only classic works from the ancient 
Greeks, we are apt to take for granted that all antiquity was 
classical, and to doubt the existence among the ancients of a 
vulgar dialect considerably different from those polished ones that 
have come down to us. Hence Romaic is generally considered 
to be a corruption of the Alexandrian Attic, whereas its prevail- 
ing type is not Attic but Aeolo-Doric ; besides, vulgar dialects 
are not wont to derive from any polished language, but from 
one another. How absurd w T ould it be to represent the present 
Yorkshire as a corruption of Addison's English ! The York- 
shire and other dialects existed before classic English, which is 
an improvement upon them, not they a corruption of it. In 
like manner, although Romaic did not precede classic Greek, 
some popular dialects must have both preceded and accompanied 
the classical ones, and Romaic, so far as it inherits from antiquity 
at all, inherits not from the polished dialects which we know, 
but from these popular ones which we don't know. As a more 
detailed investigation of this point will throw some light on the 
history of Romaic, the following observations are offered : — 

Even although Homer had not said of Cretan Greek, aXXr, 



ROMAIC. 27 

d'aWojv yXuxHtu /xs/My/uevri, it might be safely asserted that, before 
any Greek dialect whatever was cultivated, there prevailed an 
immense variety in the spoken language. It is so in every case 
where the facts can be examined, and that it was peculiarly so 
among the Greeks may be concluded from their dispersion over 
countries unfavourable physically to intercommunication, and 
politically disconnected. Besides, had there not been an im- 
mense spoken variety, there would not have been materials for 
four written dialects. 

Let it not be supposed that the original variety ceased, or 
was even materially diminished by the fusion of provincialisms 
into these written dialects. For what, in fact, does this process 
amount to? Nothing less than the formation out of an immense 
spoken variety of a new and more perfect one, intelligible indeed, 
on the whole, to the masses, but not used by them, and sup- 
planting the 'ancient ruder forms of speech only in the case of 
those actually engaged in its cultivation, or immediately under 
their influence. Such are the facts in regard to every living 
European language; and if in Italy, France, German}', and 
Great Britain, the original variety in the spoken language has 
withstood the influence, for centuries exerted, of the press, the 
church, and the school, much more must the original variety in 
the spoken language of the Greeks have survived the formation 
of the polished dialects, since no conforming influence equal to 
those of modern times then existed. 

To suppose a variety in the spoken Greek within even the small 
territory of Attica, notwithstanding the active participation of 
the citizens in public life, is only according to all analogy ; and 
in particular, since the majority of the inhabitants were slaves 
in daily intercourse with the citizens, there could not but exist 
a vulgar dialect, in which bad grammar combined with apocope, 
syncope, and other popular brigands, to murder the language of 
Demosthenes. Xenophon must have intended some base patois, 
not certainly his own style, when he wrote (Athen. polit. ch. 2, 
§ 8), "Ka/ o/ fisv v EXX«jves (i.e., the other Greeks), ibici ^aXXov xal 
$mr\ xcci hia'irr\ xat 6yJ]^art ^puvrai, ' Adqvatoi ds Ttexpafisvp si; andvrav 
roov 'E\>jvw xai ZapQdpuv. Because the people understood the 
orations of Demosthenes, it is often concluded that they con- 
versed in a style not much inferior to that in which he harangued. 



28 ROMAIC. 

But any one may know from the example of Scotland what an 
immense difference may exist between the language which the 
people can understand, and the language which the people can 
speak, and whoever has studied a foreign language in the country 
where it is spoken must remember that, although in a few 
months he was able to understand all he heard, he could yet by 
no means speak like a native. If British scholars come to under- 
stand written Greek by dint of study, though they can't speak 
it, why should not the illiterate Athenians have understood the 
Greek of Demosthenes, by hearing it from their youth up in the 
mouths of their betters, even although their own proper dialect 
had been as bad as Eomaic % Indeed, if the language which 
Aristophanes makes the Athenian policemen speak in the Thes- 
mophoriazusas be accepted as a specimen of the then vulgar 
dialect, it already possessed several main characteristics of 
Romaic. These ancient Romaicisms consist chiefly in the 
omission of the final v, as (line 1187), aaXo for xaXov, and in 
the corruption of the termination iov into /, as (line 1210) ypabi 
for ypaihiov. 

The history of the Greek dialects affords a striking example 
how inefficient is the cultivated language of a people to absorb 
popular varieties. Whilst Attic was in its glory, and even long 
after it had acquired, at some expense of its original purity and 
grace, a Panhellenic ascendancy in respect of literature, the 
other dialects, cultivated only by amateurs, were still spoken 
where they had formerly prevailed. Strabo, at the commence- 
ment of the Christian era, thus writes (book viii., ch. 1, 2d par.) 

of the Peloponnesians : " ax^ov & ctl Kal vvv, Kara 7roXets, aWot 

ak\a>s dtaXeyovTar toKovcri Se 8a>pi£eiv anavres Bta rfjv (rvpfiaarav eTriKpdreiav 

(of the Dorians, that is to say). Two centuries later, Tatian, 
the Platonist apologist of the Christians, could thus address the 

Greeks (p. 161) : — " Nw be povois vpuv airofiefirjice prjbe iv reus SpiKlais 
6po(pa>ve7v. Acopieav fiev yap ovx V avrrj \e£-i$ tols cnto tt)s 'Attiktjs, 'AtoXety 
re ovx op.oia)s Tois'lccxri (pOeyyovrai. 

Romaic is itself a living evidence how popular dialects persist ; 
for, as has been said, its type is Aeolo-Doric rather than Attic ; 
and, though it would seem pedantic to call Romaic Aeolo-Doric, 
as Christopoulos has done in the title-page of his grammar, it is 
certainly a more appropriate name. Why the Aeolo-Doric element 



ROMAIC. 29 

should have prevailed all along in Romaic, will appear to anyone who 
considers the geographical chart of the ancient dialects, sketched 
by Strabo in the paragraph from which an extract is made in the 
preceding page. Attica was the proper seat of the Attic, and the 
Ionic prevailed only in the commercial towns of Asia Minor, whilst 
everywhere else the language of the people was Aeolic or Doric. 
The history of all revolutions in language attests the immense 
power of resistance which dialects, however rude, derive from 
numerical and geographical preponderance ; and it would appear 
that, whilst the highly polished Attic was perpetuated in the 
Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek of learned compositions, the 
ruder Aeolic and Doric continued to prevail in the spoken lan- 
guage of the Greek race. 1 

The fact is, that vulgar dialects are far more durable than cul- 
tivated ones. Cultivation aims at improvement, and improve- 
ment implies change ; in other words, cultivated languages are 
in a state of active metamorphosis. Demosthenes had to explain 
the antiquated phrases of Draco and Solon : and the model dia- 



1 After this paragraph was written, George Fin] ay, Esq., historian of the 
Byzantine empire, whose assistance in these researches, by placing his splendid 
library at my disposal, during my stay in Athens, I would here gratefully acknow- 
ledge, procured me a reading of Professor Ross' travels among the Greek islands. 
The preceding pages have been enriched with various examples taken from this 
work ; and I subjoin the translation of a passage, from the original German, 
which will add the weight of Professor Ross' authority to the views enunciated 
in the text regarding the spoken Greek of the ancients : — " The Attic dialect 
was not, as, with Buttmann and Matthias in our hands, we often suppose, the 
prevailing, much less the sole methodised vernacular of the Ancient Greeks. 

It was only the refined language of intercourse and composition 

among the cultivated classes in Athens, and was really possessed by only a 
few thousands. Before the gates of Athens, at Megara, Thebes, Tanagra, in 
all the rest of Greece, very different dialects prevailed ; and though literary 
men in other districts afterwards endeavoured to conform their style to the 
Attic model, they never attained its purity. In other words, all Greece, from 
Sicily to Asia Minor, and from Macedonia to Crete, was essentially Aeolic, 
and spoke this dialect, of which Doric was but a modification. The Ionic 
race, compared with the Aeolic and Doric, had a limited extension ; and in 
fact the language of Attica, which our grammars adopt as the rule, was, 
at the time of the Peloponnesian war, but a petty exception to the rule. 
What right have we to require that it should be otherwise now?" — Vol. iii. 
p. 158. 



30 " ROMAIC. 

lect is declared by critics to change perceptibly through Thucy- 
dides, Aristophanes, Sophocles, Plato, Xenophon, and Demos- 
thenes, till at length Menander appears introducing words that 
are preserved in the present Romaic, as yvpog for xvxXog, and 
(iiyifiravzs) grandees. To this fact we owe the earliest Greek lexi- 
cons, which were glossaries to particular works, as Homer, Hip- 
pocrates, and Plato, compiled in the first century, because the 
then language, even of the learned, no longer sufficed for the in- 
terpretation of the more ancient authors. Vulgar dialects, on the 
other hand, yield very slowly to peaceful influences, and are 
greatly changed only by the migration and mixture of races, con- 
sequent on war. Travellers represent the common people in the 
United States as speaking in general good English, free from 
dialectical peculiarities ; and many Americans attribute this re- 
sult to their popular schools. But the peculiarly favourable cir- 
cumstances, arising from the mixture of races, in which these 
schools have operated, must not be overlooked. Where provin- 
cial dialects meet, they neutralise each other in the daily inter- 
course even of the working classes, and the language of the 
school supplants them all at length ; but where one uniform 
dialect prevails among the people, it defies the schoolmaster. If 
there be anywhere in America an isolated settlement of Scottish 
peasants, no matter how pure the English of the schoolmaster may 
have uniformly been, their descendants will be found speaking the 
dialect of their fathers : and from the degree to which the shep- 
herds of Laconia doricise still, it may be inferred that, but for 
the migration and mixture of races involved in Roman, Sclavo- 
nian, Saracen, Frankish, and Turkish conquests, the vulgar form 
of ancient Doric would have survived, with little change, until 
now. To this series of social catastrophes must be attributed 
both the internal dissolution of Ancient Greek, and its admixture 
with foreign elements, as exhibited in Romaic. 

It cannot have escaped the reader's notice that almost all the 
illustrations of Romaic adduced in the preceding pages from 
Ancient Greek, have been found in Homer, Aristophanes, the 
Aeolic and Doric dialects, and the Gospels. These writings, 
how different soever in other respects, have one feature in com- 
mon, namely, their popular character ; for the poems of Homer, 
from the simplicity of their style, and the grammatical irregulari- 



ROMAIC. 31 

ties they contain, were evidently written in an age when the 
distinction between vulgar and polished Greek was not so decided 
as it afterwards became. Aristophanes, like all writers of comedy, 
admitted colloquial and popular expressions ; the comparatively 
rough Aeolicand Doric dialects were in the mouths of peasants and 
shepherds ; and the Gospels were penned by men of the people for 
the people. Romaic, then, as inheriting from the vulgar dialects 
of all preceding ages, finds naturally enough the few illustrations, 
which antiquity affords of its peculiarities, in those writings where 
popular modes of speech might be expected ; and if such writings 
had been still more popular in their character, and more of them 
had come down to us, the ancient illustrations of Romaic would 
have been multiplied in proportion. Let one example suffice. 
In Romaic, paxpos is used for /u^xos, as in line 6142 of Erotocritos 
(o <ra>.a/o$) where the lover, descanting on his happiness in having 
been allowed at length to press the princess Aretusa's hand in 
his, calls this favour : 

HupYiyopta, %a\ ddppog /aov, %a\ /idzpog rr,g £wJ?s [aou. 

This word, however, was not in any classical lexicon till 
Koraes noticed it, about fifty years ago, once more in Aris- 
tophanes (opv. 1131) 'n llooeidov rou pdzpovg] Schneider and 
Reimer forthwith admitted it to lexicographic honours, and 
it is now universally acknowledged. The reflection is obvious, 
that, had this single authority not survived, pdxgog for /xrjjcog 
would have been set down as a Romaic barbarism. Who knows, 
then, how many other words, and what else in Romaic besides 
words would receive illustration from antiquity, if we had the 
then vulgar Greek in its entirety before us ? 

The boldest statement in this direction which I have met with 
is in Professor Ilgen's Prolegomena (p. 34) to the Homeric 
Hymns, where, with reference to a translation into barbarous 
Greek of the Barpa^ofiuo^a^ia, he remarks : " Yalde errant si 
crediderint heri modo aut nudius tertius tantas in earn (i.e. into 
Greek) illatas esse mutationes : ego contendere ausim, jam 
Demosthenis aetate inter rusticos eas in usu fuisse. Quid ? quod 
veri simillimum est, Homeri aetate non aliam vulgi in ore esse 
auditam. Unde enim illud dw pro dfi/ua. %fi 9 pro xplfiw, &k<pt 
pro uXptra, rpo<pi pro rp6<pi{iov, %dpy\ pro xdprjvoVy pa, pro pclbiov . . . 



32 ROMAIC. 

fa pro faog, nav pro naviscu ? Nonne ex vulgi sermone ?" * 
Few will withhold their assent from the affirmative implied in 
the learned professor's concluding interrogation ; but just as few 
would adopt without qualification any statement tending to iden- 
tify the Romaic of to-day with the rustic dialects of antiquity. 
Unless, for instance, the dative case of nouns, and the optative 
and infinitive moods of verbs, had first existed in the vulgar 
dialects, they never could have entered into the polished ones, 
the function of which is not to create out of nothing, but to 
methodize what is irregular, and embellish what is rude. At the 
same time, that the immense variety of constructions and gram- 
matical forms in Ancient Greek were employed with anything 
like propriety by the people in general will remain incredible till 
some similar example be pointed out in a living language. In 
the meantime, the argument against such a supposition is an a 
fortiori one from the present to the past. 

The Romaic dialects are in fact, like the Acropolis of Modern 
Athens, a faithful historical monument. As the temple of wing- 
less victory, the Propylaeum, the Erichtheium and the Parthenon 
connect it with the age of Pericles ; so do the ruinous state of 
these erections, the rubbish which encumbers the stranger's path, 
the mediaeval tower at the entrance, and the heterogeneous wall 
which encircles the crest of the rock, tell of repeated disaster and 
long decay. In like manner, whilst the time-worn Aeolo- 
Doric basis of the Romaic dialects connects them with the 
highest Greek antiquity, their superstructure is mingled with 
heterogeneous materials of a later date, on which conquerors, 
civilized and barbarous, have inscribed their language and their 
name. 

I conclude these observations on Romaic by a third example 
extracted from the Ay^on-Aa "Atyjuara of Zampelius, p. 700. 



1 iS II. vii. 363 : »f II. v. 196: «x<p/ Horn. Hymn to Ceres, No. 5, in 
Matthias' edition, line 208 : rptyi II. x 307 : *«£" II. xxii. 74. I cannot give 
the references for the other three examples ; but the reader will find them 
duly recognised in the n/vag <rdv xaruxiyov appended to the commentary of 
Eustathius, who cites them and some others frequently in a kind of stereo- 
typed list, illustrative of what apocope could do in the most ancient 
times. 



KOMAIC. 33 



'O dvdgisv/j,hog. 

SagaVra dub KXiproftovXa /Aid xopvjv dyavrovtiav, 

KogY} tfavdjgiu %i uifjjogprj, zcci 'tfrd pXoogid ^uff/Asvrj. 

Mid Kvgiaxri %ai {Aid Aa/ATTgrj vcov '"fcoesuav dvrd/Aa^ 

K/' 6 'vug tyiv TrigauQ d'rcb 'du, xi' aXXog rr\ ^a/gsrodtfe, 

'H xogri itou 'rav (pgovi/AYj rovg xgdfyi %a\ rovg Xsysr 5 

u Metfa 'tiro irzg&oki /aov, Vr^ /Asffrj 'ffrriv dvkr\ /aov, 

" Eiv hag (3gd-£og Kakaiybg, Xidagi pityp'evo, 

" Ka/ ftov rov G%<ji<sr\ d<nb r' stfag, yvvaTxa vd /as nd^y" 
Kavstg dsv dffoxgidviits, %aviig dsv WoXoyisrai, 
1 Ka/ rr\g Magiag 6 -^v^ovibg, r' a'^io rb TraXXixdgi, 10 

Ms r' ova -ys^i roaxwcrs, 'arrjv <7rXdr?} rov rb j3dvsi' 

" Mr}v xox'Aivifyig, Xvysgn, %* eXXa Vr^i/ dy%aXid /aov" 

V. 1. KtetprovrovXtx. from jcki^rrti and trZxas. The Klephts of Greece were 
patriotic robbers who gloried in their profession not less than the Highland 
robbers of Sir Walter Scott's romances. By affixing -xZxo-, to the primitive, 
Romaic forms diminutives even of things without life : as xa^'ovovXov, a little 
ship. 

V. 2. -Tfavu^ta for fdvcogos. %6o<rfiivyi, literally, covered up, from z^ vvv ^' or x° u * 
in Romaic x^ u - I n the inland villages this style of ornament is still met 
with, strings of silver coin being suspended from the neck across the breast, 
and sometimes also covering the head. This treasure is always the dowry 
of the wearer. 

V. 3. a.MTa.fji.u. for a-vvrifAa. 

V. 4. rnguZ,' for Ir^a^s, as from m^u, instead of rn^au, Attic vnglw. 

V. 5. trod 'ra.v for vou or otou virov. 

V. 6. Ms<r« has become a Romaic preposition equivalent to hros t and is very 
much used. 

V. 7. "7ra.Xa.iyoi for tfa.Xa.ib?. 

V. 8. *ou for onou means here whoever. o-xuo-n for <r*xu<rn from o-vxbvu. Ancient 
Greek had «W&/ in a kindred sense. The termination bu has uniformly been 
changed into bvu. wi.^ the aor. subj. from vi^a, the Romaic form of Xva.'^co. 

V. 9. a.'xo'koynra.i for a.<7ro\oyitra.t. ocrox^i&nxt for u,<x ix^lS v\. The transference 
of the terminations of the perfect active, which Romaic has lost, to the aor. 
pas. which it has preserved, is another example of the confusion pervading its 
grammatical forms. 

V. 10. -^vxovios. Adopted children are so called because the adopting party 
expects spiritual benefit from this exercise of philanthropy. -xaxxixa.^ di- 
minutive from tfa.XXa.%. 

V. 11. (Mm, for (idxxu. 

D 



o4 ROMAIC. 



No apology, I trust, is required for presenting the translation 
of this piece in our northern Doric, so much better adapted than 
classic -English to the expression of the original. 



THE CHAMPION. 

Forty twa robber lads lo'ed the same bonnie lass, 
A bloomin' sweet lassie, wi' florins belad'n. 
On blithe Easter Sunday they danced a' thegether ; 
Some look'd at her here, ithers greeted her there : 
But the lassie had gumption, and says to them a' : 
" In midst o' my garden, in midst o' my yard, 
" Is a hoary auld rock, is a weel-rooted stane, 
" Wha' e'er o' ye lifts it sail hae me his bride/' 
No ane o' them answer'd, no ane o' them spak ; 
But our Mary's adopted, the braw orphan lad, 
Wi' ae han' lifts the stane, sets it high on his shouther 
" Bonnie lassie, nae blushes, but come to my arms." 



PART III.— MODERN GREEK. 

At p. 367 of the prolegomena to his Arj^orixd "Ac/^ara Zam- 
pelius justly describes the lawlessness of literary composition on 
the eve of the Greek revolution ; and his language, which is such 
as the classical reader can interpret with ease and read with plea- 
sure, is offered at the same time as a specimen of the higher style 
of Modern Greek at the present day : — " '£lg ix rvjg l^ixoar^dmg 
diaXsxrtxrjg dxavovrfiag xa) dffvvra^iag, rb ysvog zugiexsro e/g Qeffiv ovroog 
/j,ovadiXYjVj Ostiw fidXa eW^sgJj xa) hzivrjv* To yevoc qv rragad6<*oog 
ayXurrov hravrtZ xa) iroXbyXoirrov ayXcorrov fisv did ttjv crags/tf^jjcra- 
tiav diapQogdv, xa) rrjv [^syakriv drsXstav ry\g yXuitftfrjg, 'XoXbyXcarrov ds 
xadori, h sXXsi^\>zi roafjy/xariXTJg xa) 2vvraxrixov rSjg vewrspag, crag 
exatfrog sXdXsi xa) ffvvsygacpsv dvi^sXsyxrojg xard rovg xavovag ry\g Idiag 
tou tpavraffiag. 1 

This immense variety of style may be fairly represented by a 
threefold classification of the writers, into those, on the one hand, 
who wrote on the model of the classical vocabulary and grammar, 
those, on the other, who endeavoured to stereotype the incon- 

1 For translation, see p. 57. 



ROMAIC. 35 

stant Romaic, adopting as their principle that the written lan- 
guage of a people should coincide with the spoken, and those 
who, avoiding both extremes, sought to effect a compromise by 
conforming Romaic at once to Ancient Greek only as far as was 
consistent with general intelligibility, leaving the way open for 
subsequent approximation to the classic model. The immediate 
restoration of Ancient Greek was the fond delusion of a few 
scholars, and the adoption of Romaic the enthusiastic expression 
of devotion to the popular cause on the part of a few poets and 
politicians; but both were wanting in the elements of success, 
and failure was due to the unintelligibility of Ancient Greek on 
the one hand, and to the inadequacy of Romaic on the other. 
The compromise, which resulted in Modern Greek, gave the 
requisite lingual expression to the national unity, and established 
that intellectual intercourse betw r een the several classes of society, 
which is indispensable to sound national progress. Although, as 
will be presently shown, its success must be ascribed rather to 
its adaptation to the circumstances of the case, than to any con- 
cert among writers, yet from the powerful influence which Koraes 
exerted in this direction, both by precept and example, the com- 
promise goes by his name, and he may justly be called the father 
of Modern Greek. How truly he aimed at the golden mean 
will appear by the following extract from a letter, which will 
serve besides as a specimen of his epistolary style : — " negi ds rr t g 
avoxaratfrdffzwg rr\g ' EXXqv i%y\g diaXezrov, efftOvyrirov v\~ov [3e£uia vd 
utfiQdXXsro t\ %otvr\ g/g rovg dvrovg xavovag rqg d'^/aiag' dXXd rb 
voayya ye <pa/verai dduvarov, xa&chg y,ai ciXXore rb eiira. Nd tie hitto 
rriv dXqOeiav, dsv elvat rotiY) 7} s-ndvy/a you vd idoj rqv yX&Kfffav 'EXXqvi- 
fyucrav, offoc elvai 6 p6£og you yr\ (3agQagoj0rj &%6fMp wsgJtfforegov dp" 1 o, 
n eivat (3dgQctoog. BX's-Treig on dh Xziirouv dftb rb yevog dvhoeg xai ye 
t 7rgoxo<7rriv %al y\ Z%Xov, bi o-ttoToh hiifr/ugiY^ovrai oXov rb evavr/ov, on 
drjXadyi itgeicu vd ygdpuysv xai vd XaXuyev wg ygdpoutfi, xai XaXoutitv 
bi !~vXo(p6got xai udgo<p6goi. 'H yvdoyrj yov (3'e£ai<z dneyei yaxgdv dntb 
roiourov tfvifrrjya' tlclI (SroydX^oyai on av b tftfovduTog gvg/ ypsog vd 
ffwyxaraQa/vp sig rb y'erqov rr\g TtaraXyj-^sojg rou <*uXo(pbpou y our (a xai 6 

1 ax.ofA7i(y), generally pronounced i»o/x,a, is the modern form of uxfthv, which 
of all the Attic writers Xenophon alone employs for sn, and he but once : — 
o oxXos xxpbv IdSetivi, (Anab. Book IV. ch. 3.) See also Mat. 15, 16. 

2 xtoxairriv, progress, is no longer used for ruthix. 



36 ROMAIC. 

^v'kotpogog <7rps-Tzi va -Trgodv/Ayirai va avaEatv/j xai dvrbg oXiyov stg to va 
zaraXa^Qdvp ra XiyoiLzva %ai ra yga<p6/jbsva dio rbv <ttfovda?ov, tux,} 
rotouror^'iirug va <$\)vairavrY\§Z)6i %a) 6t dvo elg rb /j/stfov rv\g xXi/jjauog." x 

It being a matter of individual opinion how far the ancient 
model may be approximated consistently with intelligibility, 2 and 
no great writers having yet put the stamp of pre-eminent genius 

1 For translation, see p. 57. 

2 A striking illustration of this is afforded by the pamphlet which Pana- 
giotes Soutzos, the modern Tyrtaeus, published at Athens in 1853, under the 

title, Nsa 2%oXhrou yguipoyivov Xoyov, n oivatrratris rns a.(>x i uta,; 'EXXyvtxtis yXuffffng, 

hvooupivfis vto vravrav." The war-like appeals of M. Soutzos to the Greek race, 
which appeared in the columns of the 'Atvv during the winter of 1853, are 
certainly, to the mere classical reader, among the most intelligible produc- 
tions of the Athenian periodical press ; but whether they are equally intelli- 
gible to the people may fairly be doubted. The reader will understand how 
far M. Soutzos has advanced from the following rules of the new school, 
which I subjoin in his own words : — 

«. 'H yXufftru <rav a.g%aiwv 'EXXnvuv xoCt fiyuv ruv viuri^cov Btrtrat yta, zut h ccvtyi' h 
Y^ayyocrixT) Ixitvav xou hyoov etrrut y'toc xoc) h cturri- 

£'. At Xi%it;, at (p^ii,o'ii$ ixtivuv strovrxt y'ovcu TctgudzKrizi' wutru Vi %iv/i Xi^t;, *j (p^ufft; 
|svjj iv Xi^itrtv 'EXX'/ivixcci;, i^oSiXur^^o-ovrat. 

y. 'H truvTM^ts rod Xoyov 'Iffirai <zuo 'hyiv ovp^'i yax^K, xod tta. yaxpwv <z-igtb"o*wv euvitr- 
x-zvccG'y.sv'/ij a.XX' zuX'/swros, oyocXn xoCi u.7rX7i u; tfagot rote u^a.tots vroi'/irais 'Oy^eu xou 
'Ho'iod'f)) xect <7fxpo\ <ro7s Iffroptxols 'Hpooorou xa.t p.i.votyk/vrt. 

2'. nSv rt Ix ruv oxru yiqo.<v rod Xoyov, xoCi ■Tratroc. Xi%t;, xect -Tru-trot. (ft^diri;, xoCi cr«j i^tu- 
Ttcryo; rouv u^atuv 'EXXnvojv wagaXaySoivovTOii clya IvxoXojg Ivvoovvrat vtto rov ixXixrov 
y'igovs ru>v 'EXXyvtuv, xoCi ovKi <tf(>o<rQu.XXou(ri rhv ocxoriv. 

Had not M. Soutzos, in the course of his pamphlet, gone out of his way to 
insult both the living and the dead, he would probably have been allowed to 
establish the new school in peace, since he merely proposes to do that at once 
and somewhat violently, which is being accomplished at any rate naturally, 
and by slow degrees. But having taken the name of Koraes in vain, and 
used disrespectful expressions regarding Asopios, the Nestor of Modern 
Greek philology, Stathopoulos, a pupil of the latter, and now teacher at 
Tripolitza, administered to him a castigation vigorous indeed but cruel ac- 
cording to the custom of the country. The important point, however, is that, 
even in this malignant counter-pamphlet, the " new school" is represented 
rather as unnecessary than as impracticable. M. Soutzos is reminded that 
his proposal owes whatever feasibility it possesses to the immense progress 
which Modern Greek has made through the labours of Koraes and his 
followers ; and that those, who build the walls of an edifice, should gratefully 
remember those who laid its foundations. It is thus acknowledged, on all 
hands, that the language is in a transition state, and that continual approxi- 
mation to the ancient is its destiny. 

3 For translation, see p. 58. 



ROMAIC. 37 

on works in universal circulation so as to fix the literary style, it 
is easier to say whither Modern Greek is tending, than to state 
precisely at what stage it has arrived. At the same time the 
existing diversitives of style have their limits, and the following 
general remarks are offered, as fairly characterising Modern 
Greek : — 

1. With respect to its vocabulary, the return to pure Greek is 
complete. I say to pure rather than to Ancient Greek, because 
the new ideas peculiar to modern civilisation could not be expressed 
in strictly Ancient Greek, without intolerable circumlocutions, 
and for them new but at the same time purely Greek names 
have Jbeen invented. Let the following serve as examples : — 

'H aXkrfkzyy'o-n la solidarite. 

' H iXsukporv-Ttu, t the freedom of the press. 

*H vavrt7t7\ irb'^ig the mariner's compass. 

'H irvpTrtg, i] <zvpo%ovia gunpowder. 

To BiaQar/jpiov passport. 

To dia'jsovrjrijpiov permis de sejour. 

To hffYiTTjpiov ticket of admission. 

To 6/UjOtorsXiurov rhyme. 

To t 7ravs'7ri(fT7i/jjiov university. 

To rikusiypatpov ultimatum. 

To vdrspoypatpov postscript. 

Koumas suggests in the prolegomena to his Modern Greek, 
Translation of Reimer's Lexicon, that, were a collection made of 
all the genuine Greek words that survive in different parts, an 
essential service would be rendered to the literary language, in- 
asmuch as an ancient word that is already current somewhere 
could be more easily popularised than one that survives nowhere. 
It often happens that, whilst a foreign word prevails in one dis- 
trict, a genuine Greek synonyme is used in another: thus in 
Smyrna the evening is called xevrt, a Turkish word, but dstXtvbv 
in Thessaly, where again the Turkish ^a^rffsg is used for 
the Smyrnaean <7rsp^6Xi(ov) or %r\irog. Professor Ross observes 
that there are even words which, though not witnessed to by 
any extant classical author, yet bear so decidedly the Greek 
character as to merit admission into our lexicons, and he instances 
dydOv/j.og irascible, from &yuv and 0v/j,6g. But such a collection 



38 ltOMAIC. 

could be made only as was Dr Jameson's Scottish dictionary, by 
means of intelligent correspondents in every valley and village ; 
and at present such persons do not exist in the requisite situa- 
tions throughout Greece enslaved, perhaps not even throughout 
Greece free. 

The greatest practical benefit derivable from such an under- 
taking would be the infusion into the written style of all the 
pure Greek contained in the spoken ; and by this approximation 
of the one to the other, some progress would be made towards 
correcting the great evil characteristic of the Modern Greek 
vocabulary, which is neither poverty nor corruptness, but un- 
settledness. Whoever, and I do not except the Greeks them- 
selves, would make sure of interpreting every word in a modern 
Greek publication which treats of theories, inventions, or man- 
ners essentially modern, had better surround himself w T ith all the 
lexicons in his library before sitting down to its perusal, for the 
author may now and then have employed a word which is rare 
even in the extant classics, or rare at any rate in the sense re- 
quired ; or he may have employed a Romaic expression which is 
at the same time a provincialism. Nor is this the whole evil ; 
for even with all possible lexicographic appliances, a word or 
phrase may refuse to give up its meaning, being really the im- 
provised or concerted equivalent of some foreign expression, 
without a previous knowledge of which the meaning cannot be 
divined. Byzantius, at p. 21 of the prolegomena to his Modern 
Greek Lexicon, has the following sentence : — "'A/iwro^gwcg/s e/i»e 
irigHSraXra) av utiiv v-rs^o^ i/naioi\ \syzi 57 ju,era<pga,6ig rod HoXirixov 
No/aou* akXa rouro rig, hxrbg ftovov rou yvwgifyvrog rb d^ri&roi^ov TccXXi- 
xbv, Qu, rb swofor)." 1 The remark is made by Byzantius in regard to 
the terminology of Modern Greek, but it receives also occasional 
illustrations in general composition. 

2. The orthography and accentuation of Ancient Greek have 
been completely restored. 

3. All the parts of speech declined by cases have been remod- 
delled on the ancient Attic, that dialect being the type of Modern 
Greek, as Aeolo-Doric is of Romaic : the perittosyllabics have 
been reinstalled, and the genders are distributed as of old ; the 
dative case, however, particularly in the plural of nouns increasing 

1 For translation, see p. 58. 



ROMAIC. 39 

in the genitive, is still sparingly used, and the Romaic forms are 
often interchanged with the ancient ones of the personal and pos- 
sessive pronouns. The state of suspense in which Modern Greek 
is held by the necessity of preserving intelligibility on the one 
hand, and by the tendency toward Ancient Greek on the other, 
is admirably imaged in the variety of its forms for the relative 
pronoun. For all cases and genders, and in every regimen, 6 ovoTog, 
a literal translation of the Italian il quale, may be used ; but in 
the nominative, 6Vr/s and %ri$ are preferred for the masculine 
and feminine, and fazp for the neuter ; whilst after prepositions 
the classical 09 $ 0, is very generally used. 

4. The dilapidation of the verb in Romaic is such as to render 
its complete restoration in Modern Greek impossible; and whereas, 
in the other parts of speech, Romaic has ceded to Ancient Greek, 
in this it has prevailed. v The tenses preserved in Romaic, i.e., 
the present, imperfect, and aorist, are indeed often written in 
Modern Greek according to the ancient Attic paradigms ; the 
subjunctive is not confounded with the indicative, as it often is 
in Romaic ; and the participles are declined, those of the future 
passive, and of the aorists active and passive, having been at the 
same time restored; but the future indicative is formed with OeXu, 
the conditional with y\kXw]- the perfect with e%w ? and the pluper- 
fect with e?x ov * 

Modern Greek has two futures, according as the present or the 
aorist infinitive is subjoined to 6sXu ; thus,— 

OeXw ypdpeiv _ I shall write often. 

O'eXsic, ypcupeiv x. r. X. 
and dsXu yp&tyiv 3. I shall write once. 

QsXzig ypd-^siv. '/,. r. X. 

1 Trikoupes in his history constantly uses the Romaic auxiliary 6k (see p. 
17), instead of 6ix&> and %h\n 9 and I approve his taste ; still it is a Romaicism 
excluded from Modern Greek by the great majority of living writers. Bam- 
bas does not recognise it in his Modern Greek grammar, and so decided is 
public opinion against the preservation of 6k in written composition, that 
some of the Athenian litterateurs who, like Trikoupes, would themselves 
prefer it, abstain from its use lest their style should be decried. This 
diversity is only another illustration of that unsettledness which is the charac- 
teristic defect of Modern Greek ; and the gradual exclusion of 6k from 
written composition in deference to public opinion, is a specimen of the 
means by which a definite form will be at length given to every part of the 
language. 



40 KOMAIC. 

The former denotes a future action which is to be repeated, and 
may therefore be called the continuative future ; the latter, a 
single future action, and may therefore be called the future de- 
finite. For example, I shall write to-morrow to my parents, would 
be translated: Avpiov QsXw ypd^lsiv he, rovg yovzTg pou; but, Hence- 
forth I shall write more regularly to my parents, 'E/g rb l§5?g 6sXa 
ypdpsiv raxrtTtojrspcc hg rbvg yovsTg pov. In like manner, in the pas- 
sive voice, Q'sXw ypd<ps<rdai, and Q'sXto ypa<p&^v\ai). 

There is a diversity of opinion regarding the word ypd-^siv in 
de\w ypd^zi(v), some taking it for the ancient future infinitive, and 
others for the third person singular of the aorist subjunctive ; 
these of course maintaining that it should be written, ypd-^ri. 
According to analogy, it ought to be the aorist infinitive, since 
in feXw ypa<pdvjv(ai) the aorist appears, as also in dsXea IXkTv, the 
future of 'ipxpfLcu, (&Xw supe?v } the future of svpiffxu, QiXu lh.?v, the 
future of CXacrw, and many others. The only reason for a con-' 
tr-ary supposition is that the ancient aorist infinitive was ypd-^ai, 
and not ypd-^siv : but since Romaic, in its aversion to classic 
anomalies, has made the aorist imperative ypu-^z, instead of 
ypu-^ov, why, having lost the future altogether, should it not have 
given to the aorist infinitive, whilst that mood still survived, the 
termination sir? 

The formation of the conditional is analogous to that of the 
future, nkXov ypd<psiv answering to typectpov av in classic Greek, and 
rjkXov ypd-^siv to eypa-^a av. 

The use of Qekca as a mere auxiliary is not unknown to classic 
writers. Herodotus (i. 32) has the following phrase : — h ds dr t 
sdeXytfei rovrspov ruv srewv (vrivi /udnporepov yiveffQat =but if every other 
year should become longer by a month. For other examples in 
the same author see i., 109, ii., 11, 14, 99. 

The perfect and pluperfect active are formed as follows : — 
*X U ysypO'W-'WM, or %x u ypd-^sw, = I have written. 
iX*' f » » *X s/ s " *■ r ' x - 

and ^x ov ysypawA&vov, or &7x ov yp&^t'h = I had written. 

g2jjjk6 „ rf^sg „ K. r. X. 

the participle in the first form agreeing in gender, number, and 
case with the object of the verb. The corresponding tenses of 

1 The letters enclosed within the parenthesis are never written, and the 
final v in all these forms of the future is very generally omitted. 



ROMAIC. 41 

the passive voice are expressed by means of the substantive verb 
and the perfect participle, as were the subjunctive and optative 
of these tenses even in classic times. But these forms for the 
perfect and pluperfect are little used, the aorist being employed 
in Modern, as it also was in Ancient Greek, instead of the perfect 
and pluperfect, wherever this can be done consistently with per- 
spicuity. 

To mark more distinctly at once the imperfection and the pro- 
gress of Modern Greek in relation to the verb, some remarks of 
a less positive character must be added. It cannot be said, for 
example, that verbs in //</, or the aorists middle, have been re- 
stored, yet they are occasionally used ; sometimes also the optative 
occurs in the truly optative sense ; the infinitive, taken substan- 
tively, is common, but after a verb it is resolved, as in Romaic, 
by yds with the subjunctive ; also the classic s>W is disputing the 
ascendancy of the Romaic tlpou. 

5. In regard to construction, the same unsettledness prevails 
as in the vocabulary. The ancient canons regarding concord are 
indeed universally observed; but those regarding government 
are very much at the discretion of the writer. All the preposi- 
tions have been restored except u,u,<pi, and their ancient syntax is 
generally attended to : «t6 ? however, is often allowed to retain 
the accusative case to which it has been so long wedded in the 
popular dialects ; $, the truncated ^sra, is often used with the 
accusative instead of the modal and instrumental dative of the 
ancients ; and only a few verbs are yet construed with the simple 
genitive or dative required by ancient syntax, instead of the 
Romaic analysis by «^o or e/g with the accusative. In short, here 
also reappears the fact of a compromise, of which, however, the 
final terms have yet to be settled. 

The vagueness of the above indications, however displeasing 
to the classical scholar familiar with the rectilineal distinctness 
of the ancient Attic grammar, is nevertheless necessitated by the 
present fluctuating state of Modern Greek, and is really an enco- 
mium on the good sense of Modern Greek writers ; for it mani- 
fests their conviction that only by carrying the nation along with 
it can the language truly advance. How just were the notions 
entertained by Koraes regarding scholastic interference with a 
living language will appear from the third of the following 



42 ROMAIC. 

extracts, which are taken from page 144 of M, Sophocles' 
Chrestomathy, and, though in what would now be called an 
humble style, represent the model Modern Greek of fifty years^ 

ag0: ~ 

1. " Orav rd tpwrrf/ue'va 'idvri CdXoofftv dpyr\v vd qdvvuvroii sig rd ai6- 

Xpa, ciXXrj 1'tfojg dipairzia dsv fAsvzi kX'sov dt' uvrd Tapd vd stfHfTp'spcaffi xal 
itdXiv sig rr\v dp^atav dvruv Qap&aporqra. 

2. 'H sXksi^ig tojv [Myahwv sXarrotftdrav hg rbvg dvyy^cctps/'g 
crgoe^gra/ iroKkdxtg dirb dd&'svsiav rov voog, ix>r\r slvai irdvTor* dirorsKsd^a 
ttiz Ttoivrig aggros rov xaigov sig rov birotov ygd<pov6iv bXiyov (poQsTra/ vd 
ft'sdyj b&rig bh s/uaQe vd irsrsrai v^rjXd. 

3. 'O/ Xoyioi dvdgeg rov £ 6vovg hvai <pv6rx,d oi vofiodsrcci rr\g yXu)66rig, 
rr,v biroiav XaXsT rb 's&vog' dXX' sfvai vofiodsrai dyj/Aoxgartxov it^dyiharog. 
'E/g dvrovg dvTjXSi v\ diogOtotfig rr t g yXuiGtfyjg, dXX' r\ yXci)66oi sheet xryj/xa 
oXov rov sdvovg, xoti nrq/jua isgovJ 

Valuable as were the contributions of Koraes to Modern' 
Greek, Modern Greek itself, as deriving from Romaic on the 
one hand, and from ancient Attic on the other, was neither 
improvised by him nor claimed to be so. These elements, to one 
of which Modern Greek owes its intelligibility, and to the other 
its power of indefinite expansion and improvement, were in 
presence throughout all the Byzantine period ; for, on the one 
hand, the succession has never been broken of Greeks who not 
only studied the Ancient, but composed in it treatises on a great 
variety of subjects, whilst, on the other, Romaic was in the 
mouths of the people, and known to scholars as the popular 
dialect. Though known by them only to be despised, yet, the 
course of things, in language as in nature, being irresistible, 
they employed it in their familiar conversational and epistolary 
style ; and, in tracing the origin of Modern Greek, it is essential 
to consider, not the compositions of the 15th and subsequent 
centuries which betray a sedulous imitation of ancient authors, 
but those in which the educated of that period express their 
thoughts with more or less freedom, and, as it were, extempore. 

Two such examples are given in the appendix to Kodrikas' 
work already mentioned, one a speech delivered by the emperor 
John Paleologos in a private meeting of the eastern prelates in 
the patriarch's house at Florence, and the other a letter written 

1 For translation, see p. 58. 



ROMAIC. 43 

in 1465 by Cardinal Bessarion, one of the few Greeks who 
joined the papal church, to the tutor of the last Greek emperor's 
three nephews, sons of Thomas Porphyrogenitus. This letter 
has been preserved by Phrantzes, and may be found at p. 
416 of the Bonn edition (1838) of his history. The Cardinal 
begins with classical Greek, but soon descends to a more fa- 
miliar style; and although, from the publicity and solemnity 
of the occasion, the emperor's speech is more carefully worded 
throughout, yet the conversational Romaic now and then pierces 
through. 

The first extract is from the body- of the Cardinal's letter, as 
follows: — " H suysvsia Gov 1 slvai xard rb -ira^ov wff-Trso hioixr t rr\g roi>v 
ffaid/wv fosra rov KgirotouXou. Elvai yovv dvdyxrj tfgb ftdvrwv vd 
Ogovriaqre rv\v vca'thiuGiv roov, xai rd tj9rj rojv. Na yivouv 2 xaXd xai 
<7Ti'7raidsv l UjSva, av Q'eXzre vd sj/ouv n/^ijv sboj, 3 h hi ftri, O'sXouv rd xara- 
(pgovyjtisiv, xai dvrd %ai iffdg edoo, '/tai duds Gr^atpzTv d'sXouv vd cag ihouv. 
Ms rbv /Aaxagirvjv 4 rbv duO'svrrjv rbv irarzoa roug sffuvru^a/Jbiv itioi rourow 
xai sxzTvog sQouXsro vd rd svdutfrj, xai vd rd 'rrot/jffp vd Zpuv (pgayyixd 
iravrtXcog, rjyouv vd dxoXouOouffi rr\v Ixx/^ffiav xard irdvra utfdv AarTvoi, 
xai oyj dXXswg, vd svduvwvrai Aanvrxcog, vd j&ddouv vd yovariZpuv roug 
v<7rege%ovrag, xai Tldira xai xagdivaXioug xai roug aXXoug au6zvrag y vd 
diroGxiKaZuvrai rb xetpdXiv roug vd n/Muffi roug yaioirZivra.g duroug. 
" Orav uirdyouv vd idouv xaohivdXr\v ?j aXXov o/aowv duO'svrrjV, vd /JbYjdsv 
xaO/tfouv irotioog, a/a^ J v& yovantouv xai avrsV/j, ' orav rove ii-Trp sx,£?vog, 
vd (SrixooQoLMfiv. 'O ds /jba,xag/rr)g sxsTvog sXsysv on xai -TroXXdxig av roug 
rb ei-TTOJffi, vd ^rjdev xaQ-f]Gojtftv. 'Avrd ovv oXa i^y/xads rd vd roug 
vouderyjtfzrs, xai vd roug iraihiuterz xoXd. " En ToiTjrtsrz on rb Qddiff/js,d 
roug vd ehat tfe/xvbv xai ri/Aiov, y\ bfiiikia roug */PYi<ft>j,oordr?), xai r, (pojvrj 

1 c h ibyinla, aov is no title of rank now at least, but a polite expression by 
which the party addressed is indicated without being named. 

2 Romaic still prefers the active form of y'tvoua.t. 

3 zhu for uli. Professor Ross noticed a similar metathesis in the island of 
Astypalsea, where beasts of burden are called not Xfi* as elsewhere, but &%£. 

4 paxeLgirw, as a German would say " mein seliger Vater" — my late (lite- 
rally blessed) father. 

s ay.h=cl,v fih came to be a Romaic equivalent for «xx«> according to 
Koraes, because «v ^M and «xx« can be interchanged in certain cases; thus 
*axa to £»«,«*£? — you have done wrong ; u.yJh v\ MiXi-, va, kk^u — but (i.e. if not 
that) what would you have me do ? 

6 U'7tlKYt~=-lz-.l~K, 



OVVrai 

dirb 



44 ROMAIC. 

rovg vd shai f/jsrgia xai rigs/uia, rb QXs/^/jjCt rovg T^offsxnxh, vd /&7)d&v 
^dcfxooffiv sdooQsv xaxsTQsv. "Ag n^ovv vcdvrag* ag dyairovv wdvrag, ag 
Gvvrvysvutsi vravrag, xai roug sdixovg ruv 1 xai rovg <*svovg, /Agra n/x7jg. 
Mtj^s!/ shai dXafyvizoi, ag shai ravsivoi xai rips^or xai f/^dh evQv/J, 
on shai QafftXsojg d-royovot, dfir} ag sv&vfx,ovvrai on shai diojy/xsvoi 
rh roffov rav, bpfiavoi, ^svoi, oXovcruyor on shai %psia va ^ovv aito <*&va 
yipiw xai on av d'sv s^bxriv dpsrr\v, av ovdsv shai (ppovifioi, av ovdsv 
shai ra<7Tsivoi, av ovdsv nfiutft Kavrag, hubs rovg dsXovv rifAqfftiv 01 aXXoi, 
dfiri CsXovv rovg d<7roo~rps<ps68ai irdvrsg, 'Aura ovv bXa (ppovri6s rd 
xaXd yj svysvsia gov (tsra xai rou Kp/ro<zroi/Xoi»." 2 

The emperor's speech begins thus : — 

" 'H/AsTg irar'spsg dyioi rfX&o^sv birwtid-riirorz sv rfj Qpayyta, xai syoj 
ovdsv l%iv^y\%a fiovog sXdsTv. 'Ovds syui Yip^d^v ravrrjv rr\v vwoQeoiv 
rpairog, dXX' $vdv{j,e?a8s on 6 Karrip (jjov, b SaffiXevg, dnb rh xaiph 
oitov yjv sig rb s^a/y^Xiov, 3 xai sdrsiXs rh svdaifiova 'ludvvvjv sxsTvov sig 
rrjv 'XraXiav, xai ijp^aro rov roiovrov spyov' sniGratiQs ydp rh QaciXsa, 
rh war spa /xou, xai ryv yvwffiv dvrov xai rrjv Tpdfyv, on ov fiovov 
vvcY\pysv dpicrog (piXodofog, dXXd xai ruv doy/Jbdruv rrjg sxxXrjffiag 
Xsirrbrarog s£r\yy\r7]g. ^E/p/s yap Gvvr,yopov xai rh Jlarpidpyj\v 
sxsTvov xvpiv 4 'Evdv/Jbtov, rh ovrcog svdpsroy xai hoXoyov dxpbrarov. 
Totfovrot ds xai ryfXixovroi virdpyovrsg bvx \vbr\tiav rov roiovrov spyov rr,v 
I'Ttiysipridiv^ dXXd xai ?jp<*avro, xai eiredvfiovv rsXsiwffai dvrb. 'O xaipbg 
ds s/UiWobiCs rovro' e<pdu6sv ovv rb spyov xai sig ^fidg, bv% &6itsp sig rovg 
<xpb ijfioov, dXXd xai /xaXXov xpsirror'spoog." 

In the first of these examples the Cardinal's Romaic is elevated 
somewhat by his knowledge of Ancient Greek, and in the second 
the emperor's Ancient Greek is lowered by his daily habit of 

1 Thus are formed the Romaic possessive pronouns : — 

o 10*1x0; /zov r= my, o l^ixos f*xs = OUT. 

„ „ ,rou = thy. „ „ eras = your. 



„ „ rou = his or its. „ „ tovs 

„ „ ttis = her or its. „ „ rav 



\ = their. 



lhxo$ used frequently to be written as in the text, with an initial s. 

2 For translation, see p. 58. 

s ilctpfaiov, the isthmus of Corinth, so called from the distance across being 
about six miles. 

* xvpv for xv£iov. There are very early instances of the termination tos 
being contracted into is. see No. 284 of Boekh's collection of inscriptions, 
where a^^t^j occurs for Atifiyrpes. 

5 For translation, see p. 59. 



ROMAIC. 45 

speaking almost Romaic in familiar conversation ; for the Car- 
dinal could not have admitted so much Romaic into a letter, 
unless such had been the style of familiar conversation among 
the learned of that period. That the Cardinal did not attempt 
fine writing is very evident ; and that the emperor, without aim- 
ing at classicism, spoke naturally in the somewhat higher style 
which the occasion demanded, appears from the use of j'x/vqAixa 
for exivqQriv, from the construction first of fyga/Miv with the ac- 
cusative, and then of vjp^aro with the genitive, as well as from 
the accusative^ with «<ro. These instances of negligence disprove 
all affectation of propriety ; and it is thus clearly established 
that, towards the close of the Byzantine empire, there was being 
formed amongst the educated, without any set purpose whatever, 
and merely under the force of circumstances, a middle dialect 
between the Ancient Greek of professedly literary composi- 
tions on the one hand, and the Romaic of the vulgar on the 
other. 

Although this medley of classicism and vulgarism continued to 
circulate among the learned — because though base it was conve- 
nient coin — after the fall of Constantinople, as I doubt not it 
also circulated amongst them many centuries before, yet its only 
chance of recognition and purification lay in the emancipation of 
the Greek mind, in the disruption of the scholastic system which 
confined all learning to the study of the ancients, and in the con- 
sequent demand for a truly national language and literature. 
That period came, and Eugenius was its " representative man." 
Born at Corfu in 1716 of an ancient and honourable but no 
longer wealthy family, he seems to have early attracted attention 
by his capacity for learning. By the liberality of certain mer- 
chants, he was enabled to study in Italy and other countries, 
where he acquired the Latin, Italian, French, German, and 
Hebrew languages, together witli an immense stock of miscella- 
neous lore. In his voluminous works he appears as a preacher 
and divine, a mathematician and philosopher, but his most 
efficient services were rendered in the direction of schools, or 
rather, as from the higher instruction dispensed they should be 
caljed, colleges, which the Greeks in Turkey had full liberty to 
maintain at their own expense. 

To estimate these services aright it must be remembered that, 



46 ROMAIC. 

at the beginning of last century, the Greek mind, no less, than 
the Greek nationality, was in bondage : Turkish domination 
chained up the one, ecclesiastical bigotry locked up the other. 
In 1715 one of Eugenius' predecessors in the direction of the 
school at Jannina, by only a cursory reference to Malebranche, 
gave offence to the clergy, who in philosophy tolerated only the 
pagan Aristotle ; and this spirit of exclusiveness was extended to 
subjects the most remote from theology. 

Wherever Eugenius presided he introduced mathematical 
studies, and over the gate of the school on Mount Athos, of 
which he was the first director, he had Plato's dictum inscribed: — 

Too [JjYi OsXovn (fu^wyuxfoj rag Ovpag. 

In philosophy, from the just balance of his own mind no less than 
from the policy dictated by his circumstances, he prelected 
rather as a critic than as the advocate of a system, usually giving 
two series of lessons on the same subject, in the course of which 
he expounded the views of two different, often of two adverse 
authors. Notwithstanding this moderation, however, he was 
manifestly a reformer, and therefore all who kept plodding along 
the beaten track which he had left, became his enemies. Be- 
cause, holding tradition comparatively cheap, he thought it worth 
while to meet philosophers on their own ground, and show the 
compatibility of reason with revelation, the monks alleged that 
infidelity was preaching from the professorial chair ; and gram- 
marians were found among his colleagues who stigmatized his 
lessons in arithmetic and geometry as superfluous and useless. 
(tfepirra, xai ayjn^a.) But for the prestige of his sacerdotal 
character, the popularity of his preaching, and the fame of his 
learning, this outcry of bigots, clerical and scholastic, would have 
shut up at its threshold his useful career ; and it did avail to 
drive him successively from the directorship of the schools at 
Jannina, on Mount Athos, and in Constantinople. On this last 
occasion (1765) he retired to Germany, where he spent ten 
years, chiefly at Leipsic, publishing his works. Of these his 
logic, written in Ancient Greek, became the basis of all philoso- 
phical study to the Greeks ; and the contents of his 2vaprtov 
'"Evrpirov (threefold cord. See Ecclesiastes iv. 12), written in 



ROMAIC. 47 

the middle dialect referred to above, which, under the pen of 
Eugenius, received almost the very form it now has under 
the name of Modern Greek, show how eager he was to build 
up the faith of his countrymen on a solid foundation. These 
contents are translations of Soame Jenyns on the divinity of 
Christianity, Desaubre on the internal credibility of the Evan- 
gelists, and Calmet on the genealogy of Christ. These transla- 
tions, indeed, seem to have been intended as remedies against an 
anticipated evil, for Eugenius had a good deal of intercourse 
and many discussions with Voltaire at Berlin, and thus learned 
to appreciate the dangers of that mental revolution which 
obtained so terrible an expression on the political arena of France 
towards the close of his own life. 

In 1775, on the invitation of Catherine II., he went to St 
Petersburg, where, after directing for a short time an institution 
for the education of young Russian nobles, he was raised to the 
priesthood, having previously had only deacon's orders, and 
appointed bishop of Sclavonia and Kherson. He afterwards 
demitted his bishopric, and returned to St Petersburg, where, 
pursuing his learned studies to the last, he died in 1806. 

A detailed biography of Eugenius, for which, however, the 
materials are not known to exist, would unfold to our view that 
awakening of the Greek mind under which the Turkish yoke 
became insupportable, and the struggle for national independence 
a necessity. From the period of the schism until Eugenius, 
the only intellectual commerce between the east and west of 
Europe consisted in works of controversial theology, so numerous 
indeed as to form of themselves an extensive library ; but, from 
the abstruseness of their subjects, of doubtful edification to their 
authors, and absolutely barren to the people. Eugenius, how- 
ever, brought the Greek mind into contact with the science and 
philosophy of the west, and from his time till now, Greek scho- 
lars have been eagerly appropriating, after his example, the 
accumulated treasures of Italy and France, Germany and Eng- 
land. Now, for the expression of this immense amount of various 
new matter, the classical vocabulary no longer sufficed, as when 
Aristotle was the only master of philosophy, and Euclid of 
mathematics in the Greek schools. At the very outset of his 
admirable treatise on Religious Toleration, Eugenius finds it 



48 ROMAIC. 

convenient to frame a new word, dvsfydpyiaxs/a, that should exactly 
express that idea, and so in a thousand other instances. Besides, 
in consequence of the mental awakening, before Eugenius ended 
his career, it was no longer a few hundred youths that were to 
be taught science and philosophy, but a whole nation, unprac- 
tised in Ancient Greek, that was to be instructed in its rights, 
animated to their vindication, and, if successful, guided in their 
exercise. A dialect intelligible to all, and at the same time ade- 
quate to the expression of whatever belongs to modern civilization, 
thus became educationally and politically a national want ; nor 
can the fact be otherwise accounted for that all learned Greeks, 
who are at the same time public-spirited citizens and practical 
men, have discarded Ancient Greek in their compositions, and 
adopted the Modern. 

Eugenius' greatest feat in respect of Greek was his translation 
into Homeric verse of Virgil's Georgics and iEneid ; but, as 
regards the subject of these pages, it remains only to give a 
specimen of what may be called his Modern Greek. The follow- 
ing is the second paragraph of his tract on Religious Toleration: 
" ©eXo/xsv rbv avs^iSpyjtfzov 1 tyXurriv lyi7sCe/a£, dia vd /Jb7\ rbv s^oj/asv 
adtafiopov. 'O adtafiopog 8sv taGyzi' 6 atfa^g, xcci dvdXyr\rog avaufdqrs/. 
6 dvaiffdyjruv stg rl vd yvfAvdtfyj, xal sig r) vd s*xihs'i£r\ rv\v durov dvoyj\v \ 
xa) sxsTvog Ifg rbv oitoTov budev diapspsi, sirs rovro sirs sxsTvo tfKfrevercti, 
koiolv irors Q'sXsi Xd&ei vrsp) rd Titfrsvrsa /xspi/xvav, (ppovrida, bXcog sTTiffr- 
po<prjV J 'Oudsv irpbg, durov rd rr\g <7ri6rsojg Kttiriv diupHt/A'svug ixr\ e^ovra. 
'Avs<*iQp7j<r%og dsv yivsrai xup/ojg 6 roiourdg, dXX* shat adpqcixog. ' * 

That middle dialect, of which the above is an example, Euge- 
nius employed only in his more popular works, and was far from 
contemplating that universal sovereignty which Modern Greek 
has now acquired. All his strictly philosophical writings are in 
ancient Greek, and he scouts in no very gentle terms the idea of 
teaching philosophy in a popular dialect. In his Logic, page 50, 
he says : — u To/£ yap h v<psi %udaiw 'TTapsvutputyxsvoig syxouSoufAevoi <piXo- 
(focpixoTg Xs^tdioig, durov /Aovovouyu rov rv\g yvoitfsojg v-^oug rfj xs<paXjj 
-^avsiv hixaffi' xal piXotiotpovvrsg dtfuidsvrag, dvoqrc ivou6i vsavrxug- 
9 Extiuptxrsov upa rd yuhaJ'i6ri <piXo6o<pe?v sKayyeXXo/Mva Si&Xiddpia, rr,g 

! AvilfytirxM. This, and the cognate terras, which Eugenius framed, were 
received into the language, and are now in common use. 
2 For translation, see p. 59. 



ROMAIC. 40 

'EXXddog tpojvrjg wg oiov rs i'Tn/ueXov/Aevovg, y\g avzv ovds rwv ftukai TCi<piXo6o- 
pyxoruv i<rrh d'ff6vaffdai. v 1 His influence on the language therefore 
was mainly indirect ; he prepared the way for a change in it by 
developing the kvhidkrog \6yog of the nation ; the direct influence 
was to be exerted by others, and the man whose writings contri- 
buted most to methodise and recommend modern Greek, was 
Koraes. 

Born at Smyrna in 1748, the two sentiments, which formed his 
main-springs of action throughout life, were early developed, 
namely, patriotism, synonymous in his case with hatred of the 
Turk, and a passion for learning. In his native town he was 
greatly assisted in his lingual and other studies by the Dutch 
consular chaplain, Bernhard Keun, of whom he makes frequent 
and affectionate mention in his autobiography and correspondence. 
At the age of twenty-four he became his father's mercantile 
agent at Amsterdam, where he spent six years ; but the ledger 
was the least interesting of his books, and in 1778 he was 
recalled. He returned with the greatest reluctance, because his 
darling project was to study medicine in France, in order that, 
should he be obliged to live among the Turks, he might exercise 
among them the only profession which procured respectful treat- 
ment for the Greeks. After four melancholy years at Smyrna, 
his wishes were at length complied with, and in 1782 he arrived 
at Montpellier. He distinguished himself in this famous medical 
school, and, having obtained his diploma, removed to Paris in 
1788, where, instead of practising his profession, he engaged in 
literary labours, most of them having a patriotic aim, and where 
he died in 1833. 

Let no one conclude, from the fame of Koraes in connection 
with Modern Greek, that in general scholarship he was inferior 
to the best of his cotemporaries ; on the contrary, his researches 
into Modern Greek disclose his immense erudition in the Ancient, 
of which besides he gave other and special proofs. Few could 
have produced a translation of Hippocrates mpt aepuv, uddruv, %vA 
rovruv equal to that which he published in 1800, with long prole- 
gomena and notes. Nor was his scholarship unacknowledged by 
his cotemporaries. Napoleon selected him to prepare a transla- 
tion of Strabo's geography, the first volume of which was pre- 

1 For translation, see p. 60. 

E 



50 KOMAIC. 

sented to the emperor in 1805. In a letter dated Leydeu, July 
22d of that same year, Wyttenbach, writing to Larcher, calls 
Koraes " not only a Grecian, but a veritable Greek." In 1807, 
his edition of Isocrates procured for him the title " Patriarch of 
Greek Philology," and in 1814, he received an official letter 
inquiring if he would accept a Greek chair in the College Royal. 
But certainly, whilst the Greeks are proud of him as a scholar, it 
is as a national benefactor that his memory is retained with 
gratitude, and his name mentioned with veneration. 

The four brothers, Zosimades, distinguished above all other 
Greek merchants for munificence, — and the merchants have been 
princes to the enslaved Greeks by their patronage of letters — 
addressed to Koraes, long before the outbreak of the Greek 
revolution, this question : nohg slvat 6 rpoirog rou vd ziriraybv7\ rig 
rnv agxop'eviiv rr\g 'EWddog ava<ysvvri(fiv ; what is the way to further 
the begun regeneration of Greece % Koraes, in his answer, urged' 
the diffusion of the classic Greek authors, with notes in Ancient, 
and prolegomena in Modern Greek ; and was himself charged 
with the execution of the work. Thus originated the " Greek 
Library," consisting of 17 vols., the first of which, called 
Upodpo/Mog, appeared in 1805, one year before the death of Euge- 
nius, and made a great sensation. Amid the general enthusiasm 
which greeted the successive volumes, might be heard, as in the 
case of Eugenius, the grumbling of the clergy, who mistook the 
foe of superstition for an infidel, and the sneer of the pedants who 
affected the Mrs fioi XsTcdvrjv susceptibility at the installation of 
Modern Greek. Koraes demonstrated the absolute necessity, in 
order to national reconstitution and progress, of adopting a truly 
national language : applying philosophical criticism, under the 
light of antiquity, to Romaic, he discovered in it innumerable 
remains of Ancient Greek, and showed how far at that time they 
might be restored to their ancient forms ; finally, by his volumi- 
nous compositions in Modern Greek, remarkable for perspicuity, 
I may not say he presented his countrymen with a language 
of his framing, but he made them conscious of possessing a 
language which required only cultivation to rank with the most 
polished of Europe. Besides the seventeen volumes of the " Greek 
Library," Koraes published twenty-two others of or on Greek 
literature, including five of the "Ar«*r«, that inestimable treasure 



ROMAIC. 51 

to the student of Romaic and Modern Greek. The gigantic 
industry of Koraes may be imagined from the extent of his 
authorship and editorship, amounting together, to not less than 
fifty octavo volumes ; and this exclusive of an immense corres- 
pondence, in which the strength of both his private friendship 
and his patriotism conspicuously appears. In short, on account 
of his labours, and the privations in the midst of which they were 
carried on, Koraes may justly be called the literary hero and 
martyr of the Greek revolution. 

An anecdote from the recent history of Greek lexicography 
will show that the ecclesiastical, the most powerfully constituted 
interest among the Greeks, was not with Koraes ; and this will 
be another proof that, had rtot the movement he led on corres- 
ponded with the nation's wants, it could not have succeeded. 
In 1800, the question was raised at the instance of Photiades, 
director of the Greek school at Bucharest, " How can we get a 
useful lexicon for our schools f At that time, besides the Miyoc 
Asg/xoV of Barinus, dedicated to Leo X., and wholly in Ancient 
Greek, Romaic-speaking youths had no help in their classical 
studies save the small and very defective quarto of Constantinos, 
published in 1754, and written in the spoken dialect. The above 
question received practical answers from Vienna and Constanti- 
nople. From the former, Gazes sent his Modern Greek transla- 
tion of Schneider's lexicon to Venice, where it was published in 
three 4to volumes in 1809, 1812, 1816 ; and at Constantinople, 
the patriarchal school undertook the composition of a folio lexicon, 
called KiZwrbg — the Ark; of which vol. i. appeared in 1819, and 
vol. ii. in 1821, when the terrible scenes consequent on the Greek 
revolution interrupted the publication. The materials were taken 
from Stephanus ; but the learned Uairahg, not understanding 
the signs of the times, wrote the explanations in Ancient Greek. 

I would venture to remark that too much credit has been 
given to the Greek Church as the conservatrix of the national 
language. The daily reading of its voluminous services, the 
practice of drawing up ecclesiastical minutes in Byzantine Greek, 
and the study of the fathers have no doubt kept the higher clergy 
familiar with the ancient language, just as similar causes have 
maintained a certain knowledge of Latin among the Roman 
priests : but I know not how the popular dialects have profited 



52 ROMAIC. 

by all this, unless indeed by the acquisition of such fragmentary 
phrases as feov 6sXovrog, Qua, ftdpin, iL7\ y'zvotro, rsreXstfrai, on the 
strength of which some would make out Romaic to be much less 
defective than it is. If the Greek Church, with the blindness 
characteristic of traditional institutions, has proceeded on the 
supposition that the present has no business to differ from the 
past, even in language, and has thus succeeded in maintaining 
the ascendancy of the ancient dialect within a limited circle, it 
has renounced by that very policy whatever control it might 
otherwise have exerted oyer the dialectical anarchy prevailing 
beyond its immediate pale. Had there been all along fewer 
church-readings in an unknown tongue, and more preaching in 
a known one, the ecclesiastical style might have become the 
standard of the national language, and the literary obligations of 
posterity to the church would have been much greater than 
they are. 

To popular schools, and to the press, Modern Greek is mainly 
indebted for its spread and its prospect of ultimate consolidation. 

It deserves to be known that, in the organisation of its schools, 
the petty kingdom of Greece may challenge comparison with the 
most advanced nations of Europe. The following summary of 
the official educational returns for 1853 is borrowed from the 
Oo/wJ for June of that year : — 

Attendance. 
Popular schools, in which the instruction is 

gratuitous, for boys, - - - " ^1 oqiii 

Ditto, ditto, ditto, for girls, - - - 36 1 ' 

Greek schools, with four teachers each, - 72 5,750 

Gymnasia, with seven teachers each, - 7 1,950 

Private Gymnasia competing with the former, 4 ? 

University, with forty professors, - - 1 400 

Besides these, there are normal schools for the training of 
male and female teachers, as also special schools, theological and 
military, agricultural and artistic. 

Of course, without the patriotic liberality of Greek merchants 
throughout the world, so many institutions, conferring remote 
rather than immediate benefits, could neither have been founded 
nor be efficiently maintained in so small and poor a country as 
is the kingdom of Greece. Athens, however, is the capital not 



ROMAIC. 



53 



only of Greece, but of the Greeks everywhere, as is clearly 
evinced by the surprising development of its periodical press. 
With a population somewhat over 30,000, it possesses about 
twenty newspapers, of which four are published twice, and the 
rest once a week, besides seven monthly or bi-monthly periodi- 
cals, literary and scientific, 1 

Modern Greek literature is not wanting in poetry, but the 
chief productions of the non-periodical press are school-books, 
translations of romances from the French, and hand-books of 
the various arts and sciences, in which last to fix the nomencla- 



1 To combat the possible incredulity of the reader regarding this un- 
exampled literary activity, I copy from the fly-leaf of the Spectatear de V 
Orient for September 1853, one of the seven publications above referred to, 
the following catalogue of the entire Greek periodical press : — 

ATHENES. JOURNAUX. 



Journal Official du Gouvernement. 

La Minerve. 

Le Siecle. 

L'Esperance. 

L'Orient. 

La Semaine. 

Le Journal des Etudiants. 

La Jeune Grece. 



La Pandore. 
La Mnemosyne. 
La Themis. 
L'Abeille Medicale. 

SYR A- 

Le Mercure. 

. L'Eole. 

PATRAS. 

Journal de Patras. 

TRIPOLIS. 
NAUPLIE. 
CHHALCIS. 
CONSTANTINOPLE. 

Le Te'legraphe de Bosphore. 
Le Journal de Constantinople (en 
Francais.) 

SMYRNE. 

L'Amalthee. 

Le Journal de Smyrne. 



Le National. 
Le Zephyr. 
Le Nouveau Monde. 
La Renommee. 
La Fleche. 

Le Miroir Grec (en Francais.) 
L'Observatoire d'Athenes (en Fran- 
cais.) 

OUVRAGES PERIODIQUES. 

L'Euterpe. 

La Bibliotheque du Peuple. 
Le Spectateur de l'Orient (en 
Francois.) 

JOURNAUX. 

L' Union. 
' Le Labarum. 



Le Minos. 
L'Amelioration. 
Journal des Lois. 
L'Hellene. 

L'Orient (Journal Turco-Grec pour 
les Chretiens de l'Asie.) 



j L'Impartial (en Francais.) 



54 ROMAIC. 

ture is always a main problem. How greatly such manuals 
are needed is clear from the fact that some of the professorial 
lectures in the University of Athens, instead of being read for 
the stimulus and general guidance of the students, are dictated 
for entire transcription, no text-book on the subject treated of 
having as yet been prepared ; indeed, the immense disproportion 
between the irksome labour and the slender profit of transcribing 
so much, and poring over hastily-written notes, is the subject of 
general and just complaint among the students. The ancient 
| Greeks were no linguists, and their ignorance of other languages 
I safeguarded the purity of their own ; besides, in the arts and 
sciences they had no masters, and were therefore under no 
temptation to borrow. The modern Greeks, on the other hand, 
are polyglott in the highest degree, and, in appropriating the 
intellectual treasures to which their lingual acquirements give 
them access, they inevitably supply the blanks in their own 
literary and scientific language by directly translating foreign 
expressions. Foreign words, however, are rigorously excluded ; 
and even in the weekly press, the names of foreign newspapers, 
sometimes also of foreign places, are subjected to translation. 
Thus the Times is known as o Xgovog, the Morning Herald as 
6 suQivog Kygv!;, etc., and whereas in English it would sound ridi- 
culous to call le palais des Tuilleries the palace of the Tileworks, 
it is actually translated by ra avdnroga ruv Ksga/isiuv in Modern 
Greek. 

The fact, that the style of thought among the modern Greeks 
has been cast in the European mould, opposes an invincible bar- 
rier to the complete restoration of the ancient language. Even 
with the same vocabulary and the same grammar, Modern Greek 

CORFU. 

Journal du Gouvernement. L'Ami de la Verite. 

Le Phoenix (Recueil Periodique.) 
zante. | Le Bouquet (Recueil Periodique.) 

In the autumn of 1853, the Athenian press teemed with publications on 
the Eastern question, and copies have reached me of four newspapers (™ 

Tlc&viXX'/iviov, o <ra.Xaioi KaXccGgwrive:, h '~Evot'/i5 tou Tevous and h Kcovo-Tavrtvovyrokis^), 

established since the date of the above list, so that the general estimate in 
the text respecting the Athenian periodical press makes the nearest possible 
approximation to the truth. 



ROMAIC. 0? 

would necessarily differ from Ancient, because the ancient modes 
of conception are gone for ever. Capo d' Istrias wrote like a 
philosopher when he penned the following sentences : " 'Eyw 
do%d^u on 8sv shai a) \e'£,eig ours a/ (ppdfcig rojv TraXaiuv dvyy pap's uv 
b^ov flag dvtfxoXzvovv vd xara\d£ojfizv rag svvoiag rojv. 'AW ehai dvrq r\ 
fisraQoXrj ruiv idsuv, dvrr\ q diatpopa rov rpovov rov svvosTv, bvrov fjJdg 
sfAtfod/fyi vd (fufAyrspiXuGufiev rqv avrr\v svvoiav Kara rbv dvrbv rpotfov, naff 
6v 6 <rvyypu<psvg 9 xard rqv didQetiiv ruv idsojv rov, Triv 6vve\aQ&' %al z% 
rovrov npozp'/irai %al r\ diapopa rr\g e'/icppddsojg'" 1 This diversity in 
the style of thought necessarily implies diversity in the style of 
composition ; and here lies the extreme limit where Modern 
Greek must eventually stop in its course of assimilation to the 
Ancient. It is not likely, however, that this limit will ever be 
reached, owing to the necessity, from the popular constitution of 
modern society, of sooner or later filling up the chasm which still 
exists between the spoken language even of the educated, and 
their written style. 

As summing up the view I have been led to form regarding 
the present state and future prospects of Modern Greek, and as 
presenting a fair specimen of the approved style now current, I 
conclude with an extract from No. 36 of the Pandora, one of the 
Athenian literary periodicals mentioned in the preceding note. 
By comparing the style of this extract with that of Koraes, the 
reader will perceive what great progress the literary language 
has made since his time : — 'Ovdh IvyipUnpov rqg \yvoypa(piag i%uvr\g 
rov voqfiarog rr,g dirb rov xaXdfiov d<7roppsov6Yjg, /AaXiffra orav Kpo%y\rat 
•TTtpl dvrixsifi'svov xepl ov eirpuyfiurevdri 7\hr\ r\ dpyaia yAwtftfa, %al rov 
o-ttoiov hntdpyii <zpb 6<p8a\fiSjv rb xetfisvov ovdh dv^zp'sffrepov rov 'Quypa(pi%ov 
>cai xpwfiarivov Aoyov rov airb rr\g -\>vyr\g extfyiyd^ovrog, fidXiera orav 
<xpb%r\rai <7rzpt dvnzsifihov v'scv, dtfatrovvrog dyj/juiovpyiav opuv xal rpotfuv 
sxppdfctog. 'H avribitSig avrv) VTtdpyii sig <xd6av yXuffffav, Idiojg ds kig 
rr\v Tjfisr'spav, diori 6 ^urjpbg %al tfi^v^og sxsTvog Xoyog shai d<xzi%6vi6{ia 

1 For translation, see p. 60. 

2 An investigation of Modern Greek literature fully bears out the state- 
ment of the writer : witness the Bacchanalian songs of Athanasios Christo- 
poulos, and the satires of Alexandros Soutzos, both of which are downright 
Romaic, or little short of it. Koraes has left his opinion on record, that no 
great tragedy can be produced in Modern Greek prior to the year 1950 ; 
this may or may not be, but the prophecy would have been infallibly true of 
a comedy. 



56 ROMAIC. 

rov ffpotpopixou, tfaf> tj^Tv 6s b npotpopixbg Xoyog diap'spu budtudug rov 
ypanrrov, %ai dvrbg uto roov Xoyicorspuv dvdpvv bfiiXovfjbzvog, xai dvrbg 
'Kip] ruv dtfovdaiorepwv dvrixeiftsvwv tfpay/jjarevoftsvog. Noj/ (lsv hig noXXd 
fjdrj sravr/ff&vj j&srd rov ypairrov, lig ntoXXd oficag hdrdX^i srii E% rovrov 
-rAg/tfrjj irap dvrti virdpyzt en dvufiuXioc xal sXXsi-^ig dxptQsiag' svrsvdzv 
ds %ai on, orav 6 ypwrrrbg Xoyog hdvsrat rr\v ^uTjpor^ra rov irpopoptxov, 
djayxdtcog iLzrzyzi xard rb paXXov xai Y\rrov rag dvu/xaX/ag sxsi'v^g, 

xal rspi rriv dxp/Qsiuv sXXsi-^sojg 'Eai> xaXov ds ehat v dvv^ovrai 

6 npotpopixbg Xoyog, wpodXa/ACdvuv odov olov rs rbvg "/apaxrripag rov ypatfrov, 
xaXbv ehai vd sfi^/v^ouron 6 ypccxrbg KpoGXafiQdvwv rovg ^apaxr^pag rov 
irpotyopixov. Aid [Lhqg rY\g dftoiCdiag ravrrig dpdoswg xai dvndpddsug 6'sXsi 
fioptpooOyj eV/ rsXovg r\ bpHtrixfi qfAwv yXuitiffa" 

1 For translation, see p. 60. 



APPENDIX. 



To facilitate the perusal of Part III. to some readers, translations 
are appended of the somewhat long Greek quotations, which it 
contains. 

See p. 34. — In consequence of the prevailing dialectical 
anarchy, the nation was in a situation at once difficult and dan- 
gerous, and withal, truly singular ; for it was paradoxically with- 
out a language, and polyglott at the same time; without a 
language, on the one hand, on account of the corruption per- 
vading the dialects, and their great imperfection ; polyglott on 
the other, inasmuch as, there being no grammatical and syntac- 
tical standard, every man spoke and composed according to the 
rules of his own fancy. 

See p. 35. — As for the restoration of the Greek language, it 
were certainly desirable that the modern should be subjected to 
the rules of the ancient ; but, as I have said on other occasions, 
this seems to me impossible. To tell you the truth, my desire to 
see the language returning towards the ancient model is not so 
great as is my fear lest it become more barbarous than it is ; for 
you see there are not wanting among us men, and these too 
learned and zealous, who maintain that we ought to write and 
speak as do the carriers of wood and water. My views are far 
indeed from such a system, and I think that, if the scholar is 
bound to condescend to the measure of the wood-carrier's com- 
prehension, so also the wood-carrier should make an effort to rise 



58 APPENDIX. 

towards the comprehension of the language spoken and written 
by the scholar ; and in this way that both should meet in the 
middle of the ladder. 

See p. 36. — 1. The language of the ancient Greeks and of us 
moderns shall be one and the same ; their grammar and ours 
shall be one and the same. 

2. Only their words and phrases shall be admitted, and every 
foreign word, as also foreign phrase in Greek words, shall be 
excluded. 

3. The sentences shall be neither long nor involved ; but the 
structure of our composition shall be easily intelligible, plain and 
simple, as in the ancient poets Homer and Hesiod, and as in the 
historians Herodotus and Xenophon. 

4. Every one of the parts of speech, every word, phrase, and 
idiom of the ancient Greeks shall be admitted, as soon as they 
become intelligible to the elite of the Greeks, and provided they 
offend not the ear. 

See p. 38. — 'A/ i^o^gswtfs/s e7vs t m^i6ra\rai i av wGiv vrtsgCoXi/uaioi, 
says the translation of the Code Civile ; but who can understand 
this without a knowledge of the corresponding French ? 

See p. 41. — 1. When enlightened nations begin to take plea- 
sure in what is base, no other remedy perhaps remains for them 
than to return once more to their primitive barbarism. 

2. The absence of great defects in writers frequently proceeds 
from feebleness of mind, and is not always owing to the general 
virtue of their age : he little fears to fall, who has never learned 
to soar. 

3. The learned men of a nation are naturally the lawgivers of 
the language which the nation speaks ; but they are the law- 
givers of a democratic thing. To them belongs the correction 
of the language ; but the language itself is the property of the 
whole nation, its sacred property. 

See p. 43. — You, sir, are for the present governor of the lads, 
along with Kritopoulos. It is necessary above all that you care 
for their education and manners. Let them become good and 
learned, if you would have them honoured here ; for otherwise 
men will despise both them and you, nor so much as turn to look 
upon you. We conversed on this subject with the late prince, 
their father, and he wished that they should dress and live alto- 



APPENDIX. 59 

gether as Franks ; that is to say, that they should follow the 
church in every respect as Latins, and not otherwise ; that they 
should be dressed after the Latin fashion ; that they should learn 
to kneel before those of distinction, whether Pope, Cardinals, or 
other princes, and that they should uncover their heads in honour 
of those who salute them. When they go to see a Cardinal or 
other like prince, let them on no account sit, but kneel ; and 
then, when he bids them, let them rise. He of blessed memory 
used to say that, though often bidden, they should by no means 
sit. All these things then remember, that you may instruct and 
exhort them well. Farther, see that their gait be decent and 
dignified, their conversation profitable, their voice subdued and 
gentle, their look composed, by no means staring about on this 
side and on that. Let them honour all, love all, and converse 
respectfully with all, whether their own people or strangers. 
Let them by no means be haughty, but humble and gentle ; let 
them not remember at all that they are descendants of a king, 
but let them remember that they have been driven from their 
country, and that they are orphans, strangers, penniless ; that 
they require to live on foreign bounty, and that, if they are without 
virtue, if they are not prudent and humble, if they do not honour 
all, neither will othars honour them, but all will abominate them. 
Think well then of all these things, sir, along with Kritopoulos. 

See p. 44. — Once for all, holy fathers, we have come among 
the Franks, — I, for my part, not of my own proper motion. The 
initiative in the present affair was not mine, but my royal father's, 
who, as you remember, when he was at the isthmus of Corinth, 
sent that John of blessed memory into Italy, and so began this 
work. You know the learning and experience of the king my 
father, that he was not only an excellent philosopher, but a most 
minute expounder of the dogmas of the church, having had for 
his counsellor that truly virtuous man and profound theologian, 
the patriarch Euthemios. So great men as these did not intend 
merely to undertake such a business, but, having begun it, they 
meant also to conclude the same. Time, however, prevented this. 
The work, therefore, has fallen upon us, not exactly as upon those 
before us, but rather in a better condition. 

See p. 48. — VW would have tolerance in religion combined 
with zealous piety, lest it should glide into indifference. The in- 



60 APPENDIX. 

different man is passionless ; the passionless and apathetic man 
insensible ; and in regard to what can he who is insensible prac- 
tise and manifest his forbearance ? What solicitude and care, 
what change, in short, respecting matters of faith can be expected 
from him who is indifferent whether this or that be believed ? 
Matters of faith are nothing to him who has no definite faith at 
all. Such a man is not properly tolerant in religion, but without 
religion altogether. 

Same page. — Decking themselves with philosophical terms, 
interwoven into the vulgar style, certain writers imagine that 
they touch almost the summit of knowledge with their heads ; 
but being ignoramuses in philosophy, they make fools of 
themselves like striplings. Those contemptible books, then, 
which profess to treat of philosophy in the vulgar tongue, are to 
be hissed out of fashion, and the Greek language as much as pos- 
sible to be cultivated, without which, besides, the ancient philo- 
sophers cannot be enjoyed. 

See p. 55. — I am of opinion that the difficulty we experience 
in catching the sense of ancient writers arises not from their 
words and phrases, but from a change in our ideas, a difference 
in our modes of conception, which prevents us from entertaining 
the same thought in the same manner in which, from the dispo- 
sition of his ideas, the writer had conceived it ; and hence pro- 
ceeds the difference of expression. 

Same page. — Nothing is easier than that delineation of the 
sense which proceeds from the pen, especially when the subject 
in question has been already treated of in Ancient Greek and the 
writer has the text before him ; but nothing is more difficult than 
that graphic and pictorial language which wells from the soul, 
especially when the subject handled is new, and requires the in- 
vention of terms and modes of expression. Such is the case in 
every language, but more particularly in ours, because the lively 
and animated style referred to is a reflection from the spoken 
language ; and with us the spoken language, even as employed 
by the most learned men, and on the most important subjects, 
differs essentially from the written. In many respects, indeed, 
the spoken language has been already conformed to the written ; 
but in many it still stands aloof; and on this sfccount there pre- 
vails in it the greatest irregularity and want of precision. Hence 




ENDIX. 



61 



assumes the liveliness of spoken 
:es more or less of that irregularity 
. If it is well that the spoken 
r ated, adopting as much as possible the 
lposition, it is also well that written com- 
position should be enlivened by adopting the characters of the 
spoken language ; and only by this mutual action and reaction 
will our definite language be at length formed. 




ND. 




RAY ANI> OIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBUROn. 





\ 





* 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 








I 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



003 040 397 6 



